Skip to main content

Full text of "The two republics;"

See other formats 


L^vARY 

I;MU  .  WSITY  OF 

CALIF  1,'RNIA 

SAN  DIEGO 


THK 


TWO  REPUBLICS 


OR 


ROMK 


AND   THE 


UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


ALONZO  T.  JONES 


No  past  event  has  any  intrinsic  importance.  The  knowledge  of  it  is  valu- 
able only  as  it  leads  us  to  form  just  calculations  with  respect  to  the  future. 
—  MACAULAY. 


REVIEW  AND  HERALD  PUBLISHING  CO. 

BATTLE    CREEK,  MICH. 
CHICAGO,    TORONTO,    AND  ATLANTA. 


PACIFIC  PRESS  PUBLISHING  CO. 

OAKLAND,   CAL. 
NEW   YORK,    SAN  FRANCISCO,    AND   LONDON, 


COPYRIGHTED  1891,  BY  A.  T.  JONES. 


To 
THE  COMMON  PEOPLE, 

who  heard  our  common  Master  gladly, 

and  whose  silent,  practical  experience  "throughout  the 

history  of  the  Church,  has  always  been  truer  and  has  led  the  Church 

in  a  safer  path  than  have  the  public  decrees  of  those  who 

claim  to  be  authoritative  leaders  of  theological 

thought,"  this  book  is  respectfully 

dedicated 

by 
THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


ROME,  in  its  different  phases,  occupies  the  largest  place 
of  any  national  name  in  history.  Rome,  considered 
with  reference  to  government,  is  interesting  and  important. 
Considered  with  reference  to  religion,  it  is  yet  more  in- 
teresting and  more  important.  But  when  considered  with 
reference  to  the  interrelationship  of  government  and  re- 
ligion, it  is  most  interesting  and  most  important.  It  is 
Rome  in  this  last  phase  that  is  the  principal  subject  of  study 
in  this  book. 

As  in  this  particular  Rome  occupies  one  extreme  and 
the  United  States  of  America  the  other,  the  latter  is  con- 
sidered also,  though  the  plan  and  limit  of  the  book  has 
made  it  necessary  to  give  less  space  to  this  than  the  subject 
deserves. 

The  principle  of  Rome  in  all  its  phases  is  that  religion 
and  government  are  inseparable.  The  principle  of  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  is  that  religion  is  essentially 
distinct  and  totally  separate  from  civil  government,  and 
entirely  exempt  from  its  cognizance. 

The  principle  of  Rome  is  the  abject  slavery  of  the  mind  ; 
the  principle  of  the  United  States  of  America  is  the  absolute 
freedom  of  the  mind. 

As  it  was  Christianity  that  first  and  always  antagonized 
this  governmental  principle  of  Rome,  and  established  the 
governmental  principle  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
the  fundamental  idea,  the  one  thread-thought  of  the  whole 
book,  is  to  develop  the  principles  of  Christianity  with  refer- 
ence to  civil  government,  and  to  portray  the  mischievous 
results  of  the  least  departure  from  those  principles. 

15] 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  LAST  DAYS  OF  THE  REPUBLIC. 

Capital  and  labor  —  Electoral  corruption  —  Anti-monopoly  legislation  — 
The  distribution  of  the  land  —  Senatorial  corruption  and  State 
charity  —  Caius  Gracchus  is  killed  — The  consulship  of  Marius  — 
More  State  charity  and  the  social  war  —  Revolt  in  the  East  —  Bloody 
strifes  in  the  city  —  Dictatorship  of  Sulla  — Sulla,  Ponipey,  and 
Caesar  —  Ponipey  and  Crassus,  consuls — Land  monopoly  and  anti- 
poverty  reform.  ........  17-46 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE    TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

The  Senate  offends  Caesar  —  Pompey,  Crassus,  and  Caesar  —  The  con- 
sulate of  Caesar  —  Reform  by  law  —  The  triumvirate  dissolved  — 
Legal  government  at  an  end  —  Caesar  crosses  the  Rubicon  —  Caesar 
dictator,  demi-god,  and  deity  —  Caesar's  government  —  The  murder 
of  Csesar —  Octavius  presents  himself  —  Plot,  counterplot,  and  war 

—  Octavius  becomes   consul  —  The   triumvirs  enter  Rome — "The 
saviors  of   their   country  "  —  Antony  and  Cleopatra.         .         47-80 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE    ROMAN    MONARCHY. 

The  father  of  the  people  —  The  accession  of  Tiberius  —  The  enemy  of 
public  liberty  —  A  furious  and  cvushing  despotism  —  Accession  of 
Caligula  —  Caligula  imitates  the  gods  —  Caligula's  prodigality  —  The 
delirium  of  power  —  Claudius  and  his  wives  —  Messaliua's  depravity 

—  Agrippina    the   tigress  —  Roman   society   in   general —  Ultimate 
paganism. 81-108 

[7] 


8  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

Roman  law  and  the  Jews  —  The  persecution  by  Nero  —  Government  of 
Domitian  —  Pliny  and  the  Christians — Government  of  Trajan  — 
Riotous  attacks  upon  the  Christians  —  Government  of  Commodus  — 
Government  of  Septimius  Severus  —  Government  of  Caracalla  — 
Persecution  by  Maximin  —  The  persecution  by  Decius  —  Chris- 
tianity legalized  —  The  ten  persecutions  a  fable.  .  .  109-136 

CHAPTER  V. 

CHRISTIANITY   AND   THE    ROMAN    EMPIRE. 

Freedom  in  Jesus  Christ  —  Pagan  idea  of  the  State  —  Rights  of  indi- 
vidual conscience  —  Christians  subject  to  civil  authority  —  The  limits 
of  State  jurisdiction — The  Roman  religion  —  The  Roman  laws  — 
Sources  of  persecution  —  Superstition  and  selfishness  —  The  gov- 
ernors of  provinces  —  State  self-preservation  —  State  religion  means 
persecution  —  Christianity  victorious  —  Christianity  means  rights  of 
conscience.  .  ........  137-166 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    RISE    OF    CONSTANTINE. 

The  persecution  under  Diocletian  —  The  attack  is  begun — Afflictions  of 
the  persecutors  —  Rome  surrenders  —  Six  emperors  at  once  —  Roman 
embassies  to  Constantino  —  The  Edict  of  Milan.  .  .  167-182 

CHAPTER  VII. 

ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

The  secret  of  sun  worship  —  The  rites  of  sun  worship  —  Sun  worship  in 
the  mysteries  —  Jehovah  condemns  sun  worship — Sun  worship  in 
Judah  —  Sun  worship  destroys  the  kingdom — Sun  worship  of  Au- 
gustus and  Elagabalus  —  Aurelian's  temple  to  the  sun  —  Constantine 
a  worshiper  of  the  sun.  .......  183-202 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE    FALLING    AWAY THE    GREAT    APOSTASY. 

The  root  of  the  apostasy  —  Heathen  rites  adopted  —  The  mysteries  — 
The  forms  of  sun  worship  adopted  —  Rome  exalts  Sunday  —  Heathen 
philosophy  adopted  —  Clement's  philosophic  mysticism  —  Origen's 
philosophic  mysticism  —  Imperial  aims  at  religious  unity  —  Paganism 
and  the  apostasy  alike  —  The  two  streams  unite  in  Constantine. 

203-226 


CONTENTS.  9 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    EXALTATION    OF    THE    BISHOPRIC. 

"All  ye  are  brethren" — A   clerical   aristocracy  created  —  Bishopric  of 

Rome  asserts  pre-eminence  —  Contentions  in  Rome  and  Carthage  — 

The  bishops  usurp  the  place  of  Christ  —  An  episcopal  Punic  War  — 

The  bishopric  of  Antioch  —  Disgraceful  character  of  the  bishopric. 

227-244 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE    RELIGION    OF    CONSTANTINE. 

His  low  utilitarianism  —  Pagan  and  apostate  Christian  —  His  perjurjr  and 
cruelty — Many  times  a  murderer  —  The  true  cross  and  Coustantine 

—  Is  this  paganism  or  Christianity  ?  —  A  murderer  even  in  death  — 
Little  better  than  a  pagan.         ......     245-262 

CHAPTER  XI. 

CONSTANTINE    AND    THE    BISHOPS. 

The  new  theocracy  —  The  new  Israel  delivered  —  Final  war  with  Licin- 
ius  —  Original  State  chaplaincies  —  The  bishops  and  the  emperor  — 
Constantine  sent  to  heaven  —  The  mystery  of  iniquity.  .  263-278 

CHAPTER  XII. 

THE    UNION    OF    CHURCH    AND    STATE. 

A  false  unity —  The  Catholic  Church  established  —  Which  is  the  Catholic 
Church?  —  Councils  to  decide  the  question  —  The  Donatists  appeal 
to  the  emperor  —  The  State  becomes  partisan  —  Clergy  exempt  from 
public  offices  —  Fruits  of  the  exemption  —  The  church  of  the  masses 

—  The  church  a  mass  of  hypocrites.         ....     279-300 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE    ORIGINAL    SUNDAY    LEGISLATION. 

Israel  rejects  the  Lord  as  king  —  The  Lord  would  not  forsake  the  people 

—  The  kingdom  not  of  this  world  —  The  new  and  false  theocracy  — 
Constantine's  Sunday  law  —  Sunday  legislation  is  religious  only  — 
The  empire  a  "kingdom  of  God" — By  authority  of  Pontifex  Maxi- 
mus  —  Council  of  Nice  against  the  Jews  —  Sabbath-keepers  accursed 
from  Christ  —  All  exemption   abolished  —  The  church  obtains  the 
monopoly  —  Origin  of  the  Inquisition 301-328 


10  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTEK  XIY. 

ESTABLISHMENT    OF    THE    CATHOLIC    FAITH. 

The  Trinitarian  Controversy  —  Homoousion  or  Homoiousion  ? — The  secret 
of  the  controversy  —  Constantino's  design  —  Constantine's  task  — 
The  Council  of  Nice — Character  of  the  bishops — Constantine's 
place  in  the  council  —  The  framing  of  the  creed  —  The  creed  and  its 
adoption  —  Their  own  estimate  of  the  creed  —  The  true  estimate  of 
the  council 329-354 

CHAPTER  XV. 

ARIANISM    BECOMES    ORTHODOX. 

Arius  returned  ;  Athanasius  banished —  Athanasius  is  returned  and  again 
banished  —  Macedonius  made  bishop  of  Constantinople  —  General 
Council  of  Sardica  —  Athanasius  again  returned  —  General  councils 
of  Aries  and  Milan  —  The  bishop  of  Borne  is  banished  —  Hosius 
forced  to  become  Arian  —  Athanasius  again  removed  —  Liberius  be- 
comes Arian  and  is  recalled  —  Double  council ;  Rimini  and  Seleucia 
—  The  emperor's  creed  declared  heretical  —  The  world  becomes 
Arian.  355-382 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE    CATHOLIC    FAITH    RE-ESTABLISHED. 

Jovian,  Valentinian,  and  Valens  —  The  contentions  begin   again  —  The 

order  of  the  hierarchy  —  Gregory,  bishop  of  Constantinople  —  The 

Meletian    schism  —  The    Council    of    Constantinople- — Council  of 

Aquileia  —  Penalties  upon   heretics  —  The   empire  is  "converted." 

.         .         .     383-402 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

MARY    IS    MADE    THE    MOTHER    OF    GOD. 

Chrysostom  deposed  and  banished  —  Chrysostom  recalled  and  again  ban- 
ished—  A  general  council  demanded  —  Cyril  of  Alexandria  —  Nes- 
torius  of  Constantinople  —  Cyril  and  Nestorious  at  war  —  The  bishop 
of  Rome  joins  Cyril —  General  Council  of  Ephesus  —  Condemnation 
of  Nestorius  —  Council  against  council  —  All  alike  orthodox  —  Cyril 
bribes  the  court  and  wins.  403-428 


CONTENTS.  11 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE    EUTYCHIAN    CONTROVERSY. 

The  controversy  begins  —  Eusebius  in  a  dilemma — Forecast  of  the  In- 
quisition-—  A  general  council  is  demanded  —  The  second  general 
Council  of  Ephesus  —  Eutyches  is  declared  orthodox  —  The  unity 
of  the  council  —  Peace  is  declared  restored.  .  .  .  429-446 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE    POPE    MADE    AUTHOR    OF    THE    FAITH. 

Pretensions  of  the  bishops  of  Rome  —  "Irrevocable"  and  "universal" 
—  Leo  demands  another  council — The  general  Council  of  Chal- 
cedou  —  "A  frightful  storm  " —  Condemnation  of  Dioscorus  —  Leo's 
letter  the  test  —  Leo's  letter  approved  —  Leo's  letter  "the  true 
faith  "  —  Unity  of  the  council  is  created  —  Leo's  doctrine  seals  the 
creed  —  The  creed  of  Leo  and  Chalcedon  —  Royalty  ratifies  the 
creed  —  The  council  to  Leo  —  Imperial  edicts  enforce  the  creed  — 
Leo  "confirms"  the  creed  —  The  work  of  the  four  councils. 

447-482 

CHAPTER  XX. 

THE    CHURCH    USURPS    THE    CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

Events  that  favored  the  papacy  —  The  bishops  censors  of  magistrates 
The  Bible  is  made  the  code  —  The  bishopric  a  political  office  —  The 
worst   characters  become   bishops  —  The  episcopal   dictatorship  — 
Civil  government  vanishes 483-498 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE    RUIN    OF    THE    ROMAN    EMPIRE. 

The  bishopric  of  Rome  —  Pride  of  the  bishops  and  clergy  —  Vices  of 
clergy  and  people — Abominations  of  sun  worship  continued  — 
Heathen  practices  in  the  church  —  Monkish  virtue  made  prevalent 
—  Hypocrisy  and  fraud  made  habitual  —  Pure,  unmingled  natural- 
ism—  Destruction  and  devastation  —  No  remedy,  and  final  ruin. 

499-520 


12  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

The  papacy  and  the  barbarians  —  The  "conversion"  of  Clovis  —  The 
"holy  "wars  of  Clovis  —  Such  conversion  was  worse  corruption  — 
She  destroys  those  she  cannot  corrupt —  Destruction  of  the  Heru- 
lian  kingdom  —  Theodoric's  rule  of  Italy  —  Papal  proceedings  in 
Rome  —  The  pope  put  above  the  State  —  Conspiracies  against  the 
Ostrogoths  —  The  accession  of  Justinian  —  The  Trisagion  contro- 
versy—  Justinian  joins  in  the  controversy  —  The  Vandal  kingdom 
uprooted  —  The  Ostrogothic  kingdom  destroyed  —  Temporal  author- 
ity of  the  papacy  —  The  Lombards  invade  Italy  —  The  pope  appeals 
to  France  —  The  pope  anoints  Pepin  king  —  Pepin's  gift  to  the 
papacy  —  The  pope  makes  Charlemagne  emperor  —  The  papacy 
made  supreme  —  The  germ  of  the  entire  papacy.  .  521-568 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 

PEOTESTANTISM TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

The  papal  power  and  Luther's  protection  —  The  principles  of  Protest- 
antism—  Protestantism  is  Christianity  —  Zwingle  as  a  Reformer  — 
Henry  VIII  against  Luther  —  Luther  against  the  papacy  —  Henry 
divorces  the  pope  —  Religious  rights  in  England  —  The  Calvinistic 
theocracy  —  Calvin's  Despotism  —  Religious  despotism  in  Scot- 
land —  The  rise  of  the  Puritans  —  Puritan  designs  upon  England  — 
Elizabeth  persecutes  the  Puritans  —  Origin  of  the  Congregationalists 

—  Puritan  government  of  New  England  —  New  England  Puritan 
principles  —  Roger   Williams  against   Puritanism  —  Banishment  of 
Roger  Williams  —  John  Wheelright  and  his  preaching  —  Wheelright 
is     banished  —  The     Puritan     inquisition — Puritan    covenant    of 
grace — -Mrs.  Hutchinson  is  condemned  —  The  inquisition  continues 

—  Planting   of   Connecticut   and   New   Haven  —  The   theocracy  is 
completed  —  Laws  against  the  Baptists  —  The  Baptist  principles  — 
The  whipping  of  Elder  Holmes  —  The  persecutors  justify  them 
selves  —  Thomas  Gould  and  his  brethren  —  Another  remonstrance 
from   England  —  First  treatment   of    Quakers  —  First  law   against 
Quakers  —  Rhode  Island's  glorious  appeal  —  Horrible  laws  against 
the  Quakers  —  Horrible  tortures  of  Quakers — The   people  effect  a 
rescue  —  Children  sold  as  slaves  —  The  death  penalty  is  defeated  — 
"  A  humaner  policy"-— The  people  rescue  the  sufferers  —  Laws  of 
New  Haven  and  Connecticut  —  John  Wesley  prosecuted  —  Martin 
Luther  and  Roger  Williams 569-662 


CONTENTS.  13 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

THE   NEW   REPUBLIC. 

Civil  government  wholly  impersonal  —  It  is  the  scriptural  idea  —  How 
are  the  powers  that  be,  ordained  —  The  American  doctrine  is  script- 
ural —  The  Declaration  asserts  the  truth  —  Government  and  religion 
rightly  separate  —  Governmental  authority  not  religious  —  Daniel 
and  the  government  —  It  is  intentionally  so  —  The  Presbytery  of 
Hanover  —  Their  second  memorial — Madison's  Memorial  and  Re- 
monstrance—  Christianity  does  not  need  it — •  It  undermines  public 
authority  —  Virginia  delivered  —  Ratification  of  the  Constitution  — 
The  Christian  idea. 663-698 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

THE    GKEAT    CONSPIRACY. 

The  Constitution  denounced  —  A  religious  amendment  proposed — The 
National  Reform  Association  —  Proposed  national  hypocrisy  —  The 
two  "  spheres"  —  The  National  Reform  theocracy -7 The  new  king- 
dom of  God  —  What  they  propose  to  do  —  An  official  announcement 
—  Speech  of  Mrs.  Woodbridge  —  Prohibition  joins  the  procession  — 
Principles  of  National  Prohibition  party  —  Origin  of  the  American 
Sabbath  Union — Church  and  State  to  be  united  —  The  whole 
scheme  is  theocratical  —  Anti- American  and  anti-Christian  —  An- 
other strong  ally  —  When  the  Church  awakes  —  They  despise  the 
declaration 699-728 

CHAPTER   XXVI. 

THE  GREAT  CONSPIRACY. CONCLUDED. 

Papacy  in  the  public  schools  —  National  Reform  "petitioning" — The 
bond  of  union  —  The  authority  for  Sunday  observance  —  How  Sun- 
day came  in  —  No  "Thus  saith  the  Lord" — That  "miserable  ex- 
cuse"— Dr.  McAllister  and  Pope  Pelagius  —  They  do  persecute — 
"The  good  seed  "—Inalienable  right.  .  .  .  729-752 

CHAPTER   XXVII. 

THE    CONSPIRACY    SUCCEEDS. 

Encroachments  upon  the  Constitution  —  Reaction  in  interests  of  the  pa- 
pacy—  Hypocrisy  and  ruin  the  consequence  — The  answer  has  been 
given  —  February  29,  1892  —  Are  all  the  people  Christians  ?  —  The 
purposes  of  the  British  sovereigns  —  Logical  substance  of  the  argu- 
ment—  The  decisive  point  —  "  Conectecotte  "  and  Pennsylvania- 
Perversion  of  the  Declaration  —  What  is  the  nation  ?  —Religion  in 


14  CONTENTS. 

the  States  —  Does  the  Constitution  mean  this  ?  —  The  absurdity  of  it 
—  State  authority  not  national  authority  —  The  "new  order  of 
things  "  reversed — The  image  of  the  papacy  —  A.  D.  313-323  and 
1892  —  The  rights  of  the  people  —  Such  a  decision  prohibited  —  The 
decisions  of  1856  and  1892.  .  ...  753-800 

CHAPTER   XXVIII. 

THE    CONSPIRACY    SUCCEEDS. CONCLUDED. 

''Petitioning"  by  threats  —  A  senatorial  theological  discussion  —  The 
words  of  the  surrender —  "The  Sabbath  day  " — Congress  interprets 
the  Bible  —  Congress  against  the  word  of  God  —  The  subjection  of 
the  people  —  "The  voice  of  religion" — Those  who  protested  —  The 
Constitution  excluded  —  How  they  "  asserted  themselves  " —  The  un- 
deniable record.  .....  801-826 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

WHAT    SHALL    BE    THE    RESULTS  ? 

"  Preserving  the  public  order" — It  is  not  Christianity  —  Supreme  law- 
lessness—  To  save  the  nation  —  The  polity  of  Rome  —  The  Catholic 
Church  and  America — "The  State's  Christianity" — The  nation's 
perfection  —  Leo's  charge  and  Satolli's  mission — "Stamped  for  a 
Catholic  land" —  Rome  and  America  —  Rome  and  labor  troubles  — 
The  "  Saviour  from  the  Vatican  "  —  Bishop  Coxe  to  Satolli  —  A  per- 
tinent fable  —  She  will  not  dismount  —  The  National  Reformers'  in- 
quiry—  "A  menace  to  liberty" — "Half-heathenish  Christianity  "- 
Are  they  suspicious  ?  —  Where  the  responsibility  lies.  .  827-870 

CHAPTER   XXX. 

THE    SECOND    GREAT    APOSTASY. 

The  arbitrary  authority  of  the  Church — The  Council  of  Trent — "Tra- 
dition signifies  continuing  inspiration  " —  Principles  of  the  Reforma- 
tion—  Marks  of  apostasy — "Come  out  of  her,  my  people" — The 
day  of  the  Lord  cometh  —  Description  of  the  papacy  —  The  place 
of  the  image  of  the  beast —  The  making  of  the  image  —  The  Sab- 
bath a  sign  of  God's  power  —  The  United  States  "A  Catholic 
Nation"  !  —What  shall  we  do  ?  —  Our  Victory  Sure.  .  871-899 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS. 


Page. 

PORTRAIT  OP  AUTHOR         .  .         .      Frontispiece. 

THE  RUINS  OF  CARTHAGE       .                  .         .  *              ...  22 

MARIUS  AND  SULLA    .         ........  36 

RUINS  OF  THE  FORUM      ......         ...  38 

POMPEY  THE  GREAT    .........  41 

JULIUS  (LESAR  (Headj     .......         .         .42 

ROME  MISTRESS  OF  THE  WOULD          ......  46 

ROMAN  AUGURS       ..........  54 

POMPEY'S  THEATER     .         .                          .....  57 

JULIUS  C^SAR  (Statue)      .                                            ...  63 

THE  MURDER  OF  CAESAR          ....  .  .67 

OCTAVIUS  AND  LiEPIDUS       .  73 

ANTONY  AND  OCTAVIA  77 

9 

CLEOPATKA  GOING  TO  MEET  ANTONY          .....  79 

BATTLE  OF  ACTIUM         ......         .         .         .  80 

AUGUSTUS            ..........  82 

TIBERIUS        ......                  ....  85 

TIBERIUS  AT  CAPRI     .                                   .....  89 

CALIGULA       ...                 .......  91 

TEMPLE  OF  JUPITER            .         .                          ....  93 

CLAUDIUS        ......                 ....  97 

MESSALINA  AND  AGRIPPINA                                                     .         .  103 

GLADIATORS  SALUTING  TIII-:  EMPEROU                             .         .         .  106 
AGRIPPINA,  LIVIA, 


CLAUDIUS.  TIBERIUS, 

NERO  AND  DOMITIAN     .  .         .  ....  114 

TRAJAN  AND  HADRIAN  .......  117 

ANTONINUS  Pius     ..........  121 

MARCUS  AURELIUS  AND  COMMODUS       ......  122 

SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS        .........  124 

MAXIMIN     .  ......         ....  127 

DECIUS    .         .  .  .         .  ...  129 

[15] 


16  LIST   OF  ILLUSTRATIONS. 

GALLIENUS „  133 

AURELIAN 134 

ARCH  OP  AUGUSTUS      ....  142 

THE  CIRCUS  MAXIMUS      ...  .  150 

DIOCLETIAN         ....  168 

HERCULES „  184 

APOLLO  AND  DIANA  OF  THE  EPHESIANS       .         .         .  186 

BACCHUS  AND  CYBELE     ....  189 

VENUS  AND  ASTARTE  ....  193 

WEEPING  FOR  TAMMUZ  AND  ASIIERES  (Groves)       ....  196 

ELAGABALUS        .......  198 

TEMPLE  OF  THE  SUN  AT  ROME 200 

THE  SUN 202 

CERES  AND  BACCHUS 208 

CONSTANTINE  (Head) 245 

ARCH  OF  CONSTANTINE         ......  249 

CHURCH  OF  THE  "  HOLY  SEPULCHRE  " 255 

CONSTANTINE  (Statue)  AND  ROME  DEIFIED 262 

THE  EMPEROR  HONORIUS  GRANTING  AUDIENCE       ....  325 

THE  COUNCIL  OF  NICB» 347 

CONSTANTINOPLE  (Modern) 394 

REJOICINGS  THAT  MARY  is  MADE  THE  MOTHER  OF  GOD        .         .  423 

PEACE  is  RESTORED        ......  .  445 

"  A  FRIGHTFUL  STORM  "      ....  458 

MITHRA  SACRIFICING  THE  BULL      ....  .  507 

EVOLUTION  OF  THE  "PICTURES  OF  CHRIST "  508 

JUSTINIAN 543 

BELISARIUS  ENTERING  ROME       .......  551 

GREGORY  THE  GREAT 555 

CHURCH  OF  ST.  PETER,  ROME 560 

ENTRY  OF  POPE  JOHN  INTO  CONSTANCE.    .....  566 

THE  CITY  OF  ROME 568 

LUTHER        .....  572 

HENRY  VIII 579 

JOHN  CALVIN      ...  .  586 

THE  SIGNING  OF  THE  DECLARATION        ......  663 

PRESENTING  THE  SUNDAY-LAW  PETITION 733 

"TiiE  CAPITOL  OF  THE  MODERN  WORLD"    .  760 


THE  TWO   REPUBLICS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE    LAST    DAYS   OF   THE    REPUBLIC. 

WITH  the  exception  of  Britain,  all  the  permanent  con- 
quests of  Rome  were  made  by  the  arms  of  the  repub- 
lic, which,  though  ' '  sometimes  vanquished  in  battle, "  were 
"  always  victorious  in  war."  But  as  Roman  power  increased, 
Roman  virtue  declined  ;  and  of  all  forms  of  government,  the 
stability  of  the  republican  depends  most  upon  the  integrity 
of  the  individual.  The  immortal  Lincoln's  definition  of  a 
republic  is  the  best  that  can  ever  be  given  :  "A  government 
of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for  the  people."  A  repub- 
lic is  a  government  "of  the  people  "  —  the  people  compose 
the  government.  The  people  are  governed  by  "the  people  " 
—  by  themselves.  They  are  governed  by  the  people,  "for 
the  people  "  —  they  are  governed  by  themselves,  for  them- 
selves. Such  a  government  is  but  self-government ;  each 
citizen  governs  himself,  by  himself, —  by  his  own  powers  of 
self-restraint, —  and  he  does  this  for  himself,  for  his  own 
good,  for  his  own  best  interests.  In  proportion  as  this  con- 
ception is  not  fulfilled,  in  proportion  as  the  people  lose  the 
power  of  governing  themselves,  in  the  same  proportion  the 
true  idea  of  a  republic  will  fail  of  realization. 

It  is  said  of  the  early  Romans  that  ' '  they  possessed  the 
faculty  of  self-government  beyond  any  people  of  whom  we 

2  [17] 


18  THE  LAST  DATS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

have  historical  knowledge,"  with  the  sole  exception  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons.  And  by  virtue  of  this,  in  the  very  nature 
of  the  case  they  became  the  most  powerful  nation  of  all 
ancient  times. 

But  their  extensive  conquests  filled  Rome  with  gold. 
With  wealth  came  luxury  ;  as  said  Juvenal, — 

"  Luxury  came  on  more  cruel  than  our  arms, 
And  avenged  the  vanquished  world  with  her  charms." 

In  the  train  of  luxury  came  vice ;  self-restraint  was 
broken  down  ;  the  power  of  self-government  was  lost ;  and 
the  Roman  republic  failed,  as  every  other  republic  will  fail, 
when  that  fails  by  virtue  of  which  alone  a  republic  is  pos- 
sible. The  Romans  ceased  to  govern  themselves,  and  they 
had  to  be  governed.  They  lost  the  faculty  of  self-govern- 
ment, and  with  that  vanished  the  republic,  and  its  place  was 
supplied  by  an  imperial  tyranny  supported  by  a  military 
despotism. 

In  the  second  Punic  War,  Rome's  victories  had  reduced 
the  mighty  Carthage,  B.  c.  201,  to  the  condition  of  a  mere 
mercantile  town  ;  and  within  a  few  years  afterward  she  had 
spread  her  conquests  round  the  whole  coast  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean Sea,  and  had  made  herself  "the  supreme  tribunal 
in  the  last  resort  between  kings  and  nations."  "The  south- 
east of  Spain,  the  coast  of  France  from  the  Pyrenees  to  Nice, 
the  north  of  Italy,  Illyria  and  Greece,  Sardinia,  Sicily,  and 
the  Greek  islands,  the  southern  and  western  shores  of  Asia 
Minor,  were  Roman  provinces,  governed  directly  under  Ro- 
man magistrates.  On  the  African  side,  Mauritania  (Mo- 
rocco) was  still  free.  Numidia  .(the  modern  Algeria)  re- 
tained its  native  dynasty,  but  was  a  Roman  dependency. 
The  Carthaginian  dominions,  Tunis  and  Tripoli,  had  been 
annexed  to  the  empire.  The  interior  of  Asia  Minor  up  to 
the  Euphrates,  with  Syria  and  Egypt,  was  under  sover- 
eigns called  allies,  but,  like  the  native  princes  in  India, 
subject  to  a  Roman  protectorate.  Over  this  enormous 


CAPITAL  AND  LABOR.  19 

territory,  rich  with  the  accumulated  treasures  of  centuries, 
and  inhabited  by  thriving,  industrious  races,  the  energetic 
Roman  men  of  business  had  spread  and  settled  themselves, 
gathering  into  their  hands  the  trade,  the  financial  adminis- 
tration, the  entire  commercial  control,  of  the  Mediterranean 
basin.  They  had  been  trained  in  thrift  and  economy,  in 
abhorrence  of  debt,  in  strictest  habits  of  close  and  careful 
management.  Their  frugal  education,  their  early  lessons 
in  the  value  of  money,  good  and  excellent  as  those  lessons 
were,  led  them  as  a  matter  of  course,  to  turn  to  account 
their  extraordinary  opportunities.  Governors  with  their 
staffs,  permanent  officials,  contractors  for  the  revenue, 
negotiators,  bill-brokers,  bankers,  merchants,  were  scat- 
tered everywhere  in  thousands.  Money  poured  in  upon 
them  in  rolling  streams  of  gold." — Froude.1 

The  actual  administrative  powers  of  the  government  were 
held  by  the  body  of  the  senators,  who  held  office  for  life. 
The  Senate  had  control  of  the  public  treasury,  and  into  its 
hands  went  not  only  the  regular  public  revenue  from  all 
sources,  but  also  the  immense  spoil  of  plundered  cities  and 
conquered  provinces.  With  the  Senate  lay  also  the  appoint- 
ment, and  from  its  own  ranks,  too,  of  all  the  governors  of 
provinces  ;  and  a  governorship  was  the  goal  of  wealth.  A 
governor  could  go  out  from  Rome  poor,  perhaps  a  bankrupt, 
hold  his  province  for  one,  two,  or  three  years,  and  return 
with  millions.  The  inevitable  result  was  that  the  senatorial 
families  and  leading  commoners  built  up  themselves  into  an 
aristocracy  of  wealth  ever  increasing.  Owing  to  the  oppor- 
tunities for  accumulating  wealth  in  the  provinces  much  more 
rapidly  than  at  home,  many  of  the  most  enterprising  citizens 
sold  their  farms  and  left  Italy.  The  farms  were  bought  up 
by  the  Roman  capitalists,  and  the  small  holdings  were 
merged  into  vast  estates.  Besides  this,  the  public  lands 
were  leased  on  easy  terms  by  the  Senate  to  persons  of  polit- 
ical influence,  who  by  the  lapse  of  time,  had  come  to  regard 
the  land  as  their  own  by  right  of  occupation.  The  Licinian 
1 "  Caesar,"  chap,  ii,  par.  6. 


20  'flTH  LAST  DAYS  OF  THE  REPUBLIC. 

law  passed  in  367  B.  c.,  provided  that  no  one  should  occupy 
more  than  three  hundred  and  thirty-three  acres  of  the  public 
lands  ;  and  that  every  occupant  should  employ  a  certain 
proportion  of  free  laborers.  But  at  the  end  of  two  hundred 
years  these  favored  holders  had  gone  far  beyond  the  law  in 
both  of  these  points  :  they  extended  their  holdings  beyond 
the  limits  prescribed  by  the  law  ;  and  they  employed  no  free 
laborers  at  all,  but  worked  their  holdings  by  slave  labor 
wholly.  Nor  wras  this  confined  to  the  occupiers  of  the 
public  lands  ;  all  wealthy  land  owners  worked  their  land  by 
•  slaves. 

In  the  Roman  conquests,  when  prisoners  were  taken  in 
battle  or  upon  the  capture  or  the  unconditional  surrender  of 
a  city,  they  were  all  sold  as  slaves.  They  were  not  slaves 
such  as  were  in  the  Southern  States  of  the  United  States  in 
slavery  times.  They  were  Spaniards,  Gauls,  Greeks,  Asi- 
atics, and  Carthaginians.  Of  course  they  were  made  up  of 
all  classes,  yet  many  of  them  were  intelligent,  trained,  and 
skillful ;  and  often  among  them  would  be  found  those  who 
were  well  educated.  These  were  bought  up  by  the  wealthy 
Romans  by  the  thousands.  The  skilled  mechanics  and  ar- 
tisans among  them  were  employed  in  their  owners'  work- 
shops established  in  Rome  ;  the  others  were  spread  over  the 
vast  landed  estates,  covering  them  with  vineyards,  orchards, 
olive  gardens,  and  the  products  of  general  agriculture  ;  and 
all  increasing  their  owners'  immense  incomes.  "Wealth 
poured  in  more  and  more,  and  luxury  grew  more  un- 
bounded. Palaces  sprang  up  in  the  city,  castles  in  the 
country,  villas  at  pleasant  places  by  the  sea,  and  parks,  and 
fish-ponds,  and  game  preserves,  and  gardens,  and  vast  ret- 
inues of  servants,"  everywhere.  The  effect  of  all  this  ab- 
sorbing of  the  land,  whether  public  or  private,  into  great 
estates  worked  by  slaves,  was  to  crowd  the  free  laborers  off 
the  lands  and  into  the  large  towns,  and  into  Rome  above 
all.  There  they  found  every  trade  and  occupation  filled 


ELECTORAL    CORRUPTION.  21 

with  slaves,  whose  labor  only  increased  the  wealth  of  the 
millionaire,  and  with  which  it  was  impossible  successfully  to 
compete.  The  only  alternative  was  to  fall  into  the  train  of 
the  political  agitator,  become  the  stepping-stone  to  his  ambi- 
tion, sell  their  votes  to  the  highest  bidder,  and  perhaps  have 
a  share  in  the  promised  more  equable  division  of  the  good 
things  which  were  monopolized  by  the  rich. 

For,  to  get  money  by  any  means  lawful  or  unlawful,  had 
become  the  universal  passion.  "Money  was  the  one 
thought  from  the  highest  senator  to  the  poorest  wretch 
who  sold  his  vote  in  the  Comitia.  For  money  judges 
gave  unjust  decrees,  and  juries  gave  corrupt  verdicts." — 
Froude*  It  has  been  well  said  that,  "With  all  his 
wealth,  there  were  but  two  things  which  the  Roman  no- 
ble could  buy  —  political  power  and  luxury."  —  Froude* 
And  the  poor  Roman  had  but  one  thing  that  he  could 
sell  —  his  vote.  Consequently  with  the  rich,  able  only  to 
buy  political  power,  and  with  the  poor,  able  only  to 
sell  his  vote,  the  elections  once  pure,  became  matters  of 
annual  bargain  and  sale  between  the  candidates  and  the 
voters.  ' '  To  obtain  a  province  was  the  first  ambition  of 
a  Roman  noble.  The  road  to  it  lay  through  the  praetor- 
ship  and  the  consulship ;  these  offices,  therefore,  became 
the  prizes  of  the  State ;  and  being  in  the  gift  of  the 
people,  they  were  sought  after  by  means  which  demoral- 
ized alike  the  givers  and  the  receivers.  The  elections 
were  managed  by  clubs  and  coteries ;  and,  except  on  oc- 
casions of  national  danger  or  political  excitement,  those  who 
spent  most  freely  were  most  certain  of  success.  Under 
these  conditions  the  chief  powers  in  the  commonwealth 
necessarily  centered  in  the  rich.  There  was  no  longer  an 
aristocracy  of  birth,  still  less  of  virtue.  .  .  .  But  the  door 
of  promotion  was  open  to  all  who  had  the  golden  key. 
The  great  commoners  bought  their  way  into  the  magistra- 
cies. From  the  magistracies  they  passed  into  the  Senate. " 

z  Id.,  par.  8.  ald.,  par.  7. 


22  THE  LAST  DAYS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

—  froude.*  And  from  the  Senate  they  passed  to  the  gov- 
ernorship of  a  province. 

To  obtain  the  first  office  in  the  line  of  promotion  to 
the  governorship,  men  would  exhaust  every  resource,  and 
plunge  into  what  would  otherwise  have  been  hopeless  in- 
debtedness. Yet  having  obtained  the  governorship,  when 
they  returned,  they  were  fully  able  to  pay  all  their  debts, 
and  still  be  millionaires.  "The  highest  offices  of  State  were 
open  in  theory  to  the  meanest  citizen  ;  they  were  confined,  in 
fact,  to  those  who  had  the  longest  purses,  or  the  most  ready 
use  of  the  tongue  on  popular  platforms.  Distinctions  of 
birth  had  been  exchanged  for  distinctions  of  wealth.  The 
struggle  between  plebeians  and  patricians  for  equality  of 
privilege  was  over,  and  a  new  division  had  been  formed 
between  the  party  of  property  and  a  party  who  desired  a 
change  in  the  structure  of  society." — Froude.5 

Such  was  the  condition  of  things,  B.  o.,  146,  when  the 
ruin  of  Carthage  left  Rome  with  no  fear  of  a  rival  to  her 
supremacy.  Senatorial  power  was  the  sure  road  to  wealth. 
The  way  to  this  was  through  the  prastorship  and  the  consul- 
ship. These  offices  were  the  gift  of  the  populace  through 
election  by  popular  vote.  The  votes  of  the  great  body  of 
the  populace  were  for  sale  ;  and  as  only  those  who  could  con- 
trol sufficient  wealth  were  able  to  buy  enough  votes  to  elect, 
the  sure  result  was,  of  course,  that  all  the  real  powers  of  the 
government  were  held  by  the  aristocracy  of  wealth.  Then 
as  these  used  their  power  to  increase  their  own  wealth  and 
that  of  their  favorites,  and  only  used  their  wealth  to  per- 
petuate their  power,  another  sure  result  was  the  growth  of 
jealousy  on  the  part  of  the  populace,  and  a  demand  constantly 
growing  louder  and  more  urgent,  that  there  should  be  a 
more  equable  division  of  the  good  things  of  life  which  were 
monopolized  by  the  favored  few.  "All  orders  in  a  society 
may  be  wise  and  virtuous,  but  all  cannot  be  rich.  Wealth 
which  is  used  only  for  idle  luxury  is  always  envied,  and 

*  Id.,  par.  8,  9.  6  Id.,  chap.  1,  par.  5. 


ANTI-MONOPOLY  LEGISLATION.  23 

envy  soon   curdles   into  hate.     It  is  easy  to  persuade  the 
masses  that  the  good  things  of  this  world  are  unjustly  di- 
vided, especially  when  it  happens  to  be  the  exact  truth.  "- 
Froude* 

And  as  these  two  classes  were  constantly  growing  far- 
ther apart, —  the  rich  growing  richer  and  the  poor,  poorer, 
—  there  ceased  to  be  any  middle  class  to  maintain  order  in 
government  and  society  by  holding  the  balance  of  power. 
There  remained  only  the  two  classes,  the  rich  and  the 
poor,  and  of  these  the  rich  despised  the  poor  and  the  poor 
envied  the  rich.  And  there  were  always  plenty  of  men  to 
stir  up  the  discontent  of  the  masses,  and  present  schemes 
for  the  reorganization  of  society  and  government.  Some  of 
these  were  well  meaning  men,  men  who  really  had  in  view 
the  good  of  their  fellow-men,  but  the  far  greater  number 
were  mere  demagogues, —  ambitious  schemers  who  used  the 
discontent  of  the  populace  only  to  lift  themselves  into  the 
places  of  wealth  and  power  which  they  envied  others,  and 
which,  when  they  had  secured,  they  used  as  selfishly  and 
as  oppressively  as  did  any  of  those  against  whom  they 
clamored.  •  But  whether  they  were  well  meaning  men  or 
demagogues,  in  order  to  hold  the  populace  against  the 
persuasions  and  bribes  of  the  wealthy,  they  were  compelled 
to  make  promises  and  concessions,  which  were  only  in  the 
nature  of  larger  bribes,  and  which  in  the  end  were  as  de- 
structive of  free  government  as  the  worst  acts  of  the  Senate 
itself. 

In  the  long  contest  between  the  people  and  the  Senate, 
which  ended  in  the  establishment  of  an  imperial  form  of 
government,  the  first  decisive  step  was  taken  by  Tiberius 
Gracchus,  who  was  elected  tribune  of  the  people  in  the  year 
133  B.  c.  On  his  way  home  from  Spain  shortly  before,  as 
he  passed  through  Tuscany,  he  saw  in  full  operation  the 
large  estate  system  carried  on  by  the  wealthy  senators  or 
their  favorites, —  the  public  lands  unlawfully  leased  in  great 

6  Id.,  chap.  11,  par.  9. 


24  THE  LAST  DAYS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

tracts,  "the  fields  cultivated  by  the  slave  gangs,  the  free 
citizens  of  the  republic  thrust  away  into  the  towns,  aliens 
and  outcasts  in  their  own  country,  without  a  foot  of  soil 
which  they  could  call  their  own."  He  at  once  determined 
that  the  public  lands  should  be  restored  to  the  people  ;  and 
as  soon  as  he  was  elected  tribune,  he  set  to  work  to  put  his 
views  into  law.  As  the  government  was  of  the  people,  if 
the  people  were  only  united  they  could  carry  any  measure 
they  pleased,  in  spite  of  the  Senate.  As  the  senators  and 
their  wealthy  favorites  were  the  offenders,  it  was  evident 
that  if  any  such  law  should  be  secured,  it  would  have  to 
be  wholly  by  the  people's  overriding  the  Senate  ;  and  to  the 
people  Tiberius  Gracchus  directly  appealed.  He  declared 
that  the  public  land  belonged  to  the  people,  demanded  that 
the  monopolists  should  be  removed,  and  that  the  public 
lands  should  be  re-distributed  among  the  citizens  of  Rome. 
The  monopolists  argued  that  they  had  leased  the  land  from 
the  Senate,  and  had  made  their  investments  on  the  faith 
that  the  law  was  no  longer  of  force.  Besides  this  they 
declared  that  as  they  were  then  occupying  the  lands,  and  as 
the  lands  had  been  so  occupied  for  ages  before,  with  the 
sanction  of  the  government,  to  call  in  question  their  titles 
now,  was  to  strike  at  the  very  foundations  of  society. 
Tiberius  and  his  party  replied  only  by  pointing  to  the 
statute  which  stood  unrepealed,  and  showing  that  how- 
ever long  the  present  system  had  been  worked,  it  was 
illegal  and  void  from  the  beginning. 

Yet  Tiberius  did  not  presume  to  be  arbitrary.  He  pro- 
posed to  pay  the  holders  for  their  improvements  ;  but  as  for 
the  public  land  itself,  it  belonged  to  the  people,  and  to  the 
people  it  should  go.  The  majority  of  the  citizens  stood  by 
Tiberius.  But  another  of  the  tribunes,  Octavius  Csecina  by 
name,  himself  having  large  interests  in  the  land  question, 
went  over  to  the  side  of  the  Senate  ;  and,  in  the  exercise 
of  his  constitutional  right,  forbade  the  taking  of  the  vote. 
From  the  beginning,  the  functions  of  the  tribunes  were  that 


THE  DISTRIBUTION  OF  THE  LAND,  25 

they  should  be  the  defenders  of  the  people  and  the  guardians 
of  the  rights  of  the  people,  against  the  encroachment  of  the 
Consulate  and  the  Senate.  And  now  when  one  of  their 
own  constitutional  defenders  deserted  them  and  went  over 
to  the  enemy,  even  though  in  doing  it  he  exercised  only  his 
constitutional  prerogative,  this  the  people  would  not  bear. 
It  was  to  support  an  unlawful  system  that  it  was  done  ;  the 
people  were  all-powerful,  and  they  determined  to  carry  their 
measure,  constitution  or  no  constitution.7  Tiberius  called 
upon  them  to  declare  Csecina  deposed  from  the  Tribunate  ; 
they  at  once  complied.  Then  they  took  the  vote  which 
Csecina  had  forbidden,  and  the  land  law  of  Tiberius 
Gracchus  was  secured. 

Three  commissioners  were  appointed  to  carry  into  effect 
the  provisions  of  the  law.  But  from  whatever  cause,  the 
choosing  of  the  commissioners  was  unfortunate  —  they  were 
Tiberius  himself,  his  younger  brother,  and  his  father-in-law. 
Being  thus  apparently  a  family  affair,  the  aristocrats  made 
the  most  of  it,  and  bided  their  time ;  for  the  tribunes  were 
elected  for  only  a  year,  and  they  hoped  so  to  shape  the  elec- 
tions when  the  year  should  expire,  as  to  regain  their  power. 
But  when  the  year  expired,  Tiberius  unconstitutionally  pre- 
sented himself  for  re-election,  and  the  prospect  was  that  he 
would  secure  it.  When  the  election  day  came,  the  aristo- 
crats, with  their  servants  and  hired  voters,  went  armed  to 
the  polls  ;  and  as  soon  as  they  saw  that  Tiberius  would 
surely  be  chosen,  they  raised  a  riot.  The  people  being 
unarmed,  were  driven  off.  Tiberius  Gracchus  and  three 
hundred  of  his  friends  were  killed  and  pitched  into  the 
Tiber.  Yet  though  they  had  killed  Tiberius,  they  did  not 
dare  to  attempt  at  once  the  repeal  of  the  law  which  he  had 
secured,  nor  openly  to  interfere  with  the  work  of  the  com- 


7  Reference  to  the  Roman  Constitution  must  not  be  understood  in  the  Ameri- 
can sense,  as  being  a  written  constitution.  The  Roman  Constitution  was,  as  is 
the  British,  merely  a  system  of  precedents  and  unwritten  rules  of  long-estab- 
lished usage. 


26  THE  LAST  DATS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

missioners  in  executing  the  law.  Within  two  years  the  com- 
missioners had  settled  forty  thousand  families  upon  public 
lands  which  the  monopolists  had  been  obliged  to  surrender. 

The  commissioners  soon  became  unpopular.  Those  who 
were  compelled  to  resign  their  lands  were  exasperated,  of 
course.  On  the  other  hand,  those  to  whom  the  land  was 
given  were  not  in  all  cases  satisfied.  It  was  certain  that 
some  would  be  given  better  pieces  of  land  than  others,  and 
that  of  itself  created  jealousy  and  discontent.  But  the 
greatest  trouble  was,  that  in  the  great  majority  of  cases  it 
was  not  land  that  they  wanted,  in  fact.  It  was  money  that 
they  wanted  first  of  all  ;  and  although  the  land  was  virtually 
given  to  them  and  well  improved  at  that,  they  could  not  get 
money  out  of  it  without  work.  It  had  to  be  personal  work, 
too,  because  to  hire  slaves  was  against  the  very  law  by  virtue 
of  which  they  had  received  the  land  ;  and  to  hire  freemen 
was  impossible,  (1)  because  no  freeman  would  work  for  a 
slave'-s  wages — that  in  his  estimate  would  be  to  count  him- 
self no  better  than  a  slave  —  and,  (2)  the  new  landed  pro- 
prietor could  not  afford  to  pay  the  wages  demanded  by  free 
labor,  because  he  had  to  meet  the  competition  of  the  wealthy 
land  owners  who  worked  their  own  land  with  slave  labor. 
The  only  alternative  was  for  the  new  land-holders  to  work 
their  land  themselves,  and  do  the  best  they  could  at  it.  But 
as  the  money  did  not  come  as  fast  as  they  wished,  and  as 
what  did  come  was  only  by  hard  work  and  economical  living, 
many  of  them  heartily  wished  themselves  back  amid  the  stir 
and  bustle  of  the  busy  towns,  working  for  daily  wages, 
though  the  wages  might  be  small.  The  discontented  cries 
soon  grew  loud  enough  to  give  the  Senate  its  desired  excuse 
to  suspend  the  commissioners  and  then  quietly  to  repeal  the 
law,  and  resume  its  old  supremacy. 

Just  nine  years  after  the  death  of  Tiberius  Gracchus  his 
brother  Caius  was  elected  a  tribune,  and  took  up  the  work 
in  behalf  of  which  Tiberius  had  lost  his  life.  The  Senate 
had  been  jealous  of  him  for  some  time,  and  attacked  him 


SENATORIAL   CORRUPTION  AND  STATE   CHARITY.      27 

with  petty  prosecutions  and  false  accusations  ;  and  when  he 
was  elected  tribune,  the  Senate  knew  that  this  meant  no  good 
to  it.  Caius  revived  the  land  law  that  had  been  secured  by 
his  brother  ten  years  before,  but  he  did  not  stop  there ;  he 
attacked  the  Senate  itself.  All  important  State  cases, 
whether  civil  or  criminal,  were  tried  before  a  court  com- 
posed of  senators  —  about  sixty  or  seventy.  This  privilege 
also  the  senators  had  turned  to  their  own  profit  by  selling 
their  verdicts.  It  was  no  secret  that  the  average  senatorial 
juryman  was  approachable  with  money  ;  if  not  in  the  form 
of  a  direct  bribe,  there  were  many  other  ways  in  which  a 
wealthy  senator  could  make  his  influence  felt.  Governors 
could  plunder  their  provinces,  rob  temples,  sell  their  author- 
ity, and  carry  away  everything  they  could  lay  hands  on  ;  yet, 
although  in  the  eyes  of  the  law  these  were  the  gravest 
offenses,  when  they  returned  to  Rome,  they  could  admit  their 
fellow-senators  to  a  share  in  their  stealings,  and  rest  per- 
fectly secure.  If  the  plundered  provincials  came  up  to  Rome 
with  charges  against  a  governor,  the  charges  had  to  be 
passed  upon  by  a  board  of  senators  who  had  either  been 
governors  themselves  or  else  were  only  waiting  for  the  first 
chance  to  become  governors,  and  a  case  had  to  be  one  of 
special  hardship  and  notorious  at  that,  before  any  notice 
would  be  taken  of  it  in  any  effective  way.  The  general 
course  was  only  to  show  that  the  law  was  a  mockery  where 
the  rich  and  influential  were  concerned.  At  this  system  of 
corruption,  Caius  Gracchus  aimed  a  successful  blow.  He 
carried  a  law  disqualifying  forever  any  senator  from  -sitting 
on  a  jury  of  any  kind,  and  transferring  these  judicial  func- 
tions to  the  equites,  or  knights.  The  knights  were  an  order 
of  men  below  the  dignity  of  senators,  yet  they  had  to  be 
possessed  of  a  certain  amount  of  wealth  to  be  eligible  to  the 
order.  By  this  measure,  Caius  bound  .to  himself  the  whole 
body  of  the  knights. 

But   these   attacks   upon   the  Senate,  successful  though 
they  were,  and  these  favors  to  the  knights,  were  of  no  direct 


28  THE  LAST  DAYS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

benefit  to  the  people  ;  therefore  to  maintain  his  position 
with  them,  Caius  was  obliged  to  do  something  that  would 
be  so  directly  in  their  favor  that  there  could  be  no  mistaking 
it.  It  was  not  enough  that  he  should  restore  the  land  law 
that  had  been  secured  by  his  brother.  That  law,  even  while 
it  was  being  worked  at  its  best,  was  satisfactory  to  but  few 
of  its  beneficiaries.  The  law  was  restored,  it  is  true,  but  the 
prospect  of  leaving  Rome  and  going  perhaps  to  some  dis- 
tant part  of  Italy  to  engage  in  hard  work,  was  not  much  of 
a  temptation  to  men  who  had  spent  any  length  of  time  in 
Rome,  involved  in  its  political  strifes,  and  whose  principal 
desire  was  to  obtain  money  and  the  means  of  subsistence 
with  as  little  work  as  possible.  It  required  something  more 
than  the  restoration  of  the  land  law  to  satisfy  these,  and 
Caius  granted  it. 

With  the  "enthusiastic  clapping"  of  every  pair  of  poor 
hands  in  Rome,  he  secured  the  passage  of  a  law  decreeing 
that  there  should  be  established  in  Rome,  public  granaries 
to  be  filled  and  maintained  at  the  cost  of  the  State,  and  that 
from  these  the  wheat  should  be  sold  to  the  poor  citizens,  at 
a  merely  nominal  price.  This  law  applied  only  to  Rome, 
because  in  Rome  the  elections  were  held.  "  The  effect  was 
to  gather  into  the  city  a  mob  of  needy,  unemployed  voters, 
living  on  the  charity  of  the  State,  to  crowd  the  circus  and  to 
clamor  at  the  elections,  available  no  doubt  immediately  to 
strengthen  the  hands  of  the  popular  tribune,  but  certain  in 
the  long  run  to  sell  themselves  to  those  who  could  bid  high- 
est for  their  voices." — Fronde*  We  have  already  seen  that 
the  only  stock  in  trade  of  the  poor  citizen  was  his  vote,  and 
the  effect  of  this  law  was  greatly  to  increase  the  value  of 
that  commodity  ;  because  as  now  he  was  virtually  supported 
by  the  State,  he  became  more  nearly  independent,  and  could 
easily  devote  more  time  to  political  agitation,  and  could  de- 
mand larger  returns  for  his  influence  and  his  vote.  But 
Caius  carried  his  law,  and  so  bound  to  himself,  and  greatly 
multiplied,  too,  the  mass  of  voters  in  Rome  ;  and  having 

8  "Caesar,"  chap,  iii,  par.  5. 


CAIUS  GRACCHUS  IS  KILLED,  29 

secured  the  support  of  both  the  knights  and  the  populace, 
he  carried  all  before  him,  and  was  even  re-elected  to  the 
Tribunate,  and  could  have  been  elected  the  third  time  ;  but 
he  proposed  a  scheme  that  estranged  the  mob,  and  his  power 
departed. 

He  proposed  that  in  different  parts  of  the  empire,  Roman 
colonies  should  be  established  with  all  the  privileges  of 
Roman  citizenship,  and  one  of  these  places  was  Carthage. 
That  city,  while  it  existed,  had  always  been  the  greatest 
earthly  menace  to  Rome,  and  when  it  had  been  reduced  to 
ashes  and  the  Roman  plowshare  drawn  over  it,  it  was  cursed 
forever.  And  now  the  mere  suggestion  to  restore  it  was 
magnified  by  Caius's  enemies  to  a  height  that  made  the 
proposition  appear  but  little  short  of  treason.  This  of  itself, 
however,  might  not  have  defeated  him  ;  but  if  this  coloniza- 
tion scheme  was  carried  out,  many  of  the  populace  would 
have  to  leave  Rome  and  go  to  some  distant  part  of  the  em- 
pire :  and  worse  than  all  else,  they  would  have  to  work.  No 
longer  could  they  be  fed  at  the  public  expense  and  spend 
their  lives  in  the  capital,  in  the  whirl  of  political  excitement 
and  the  amusements  of  the  Roman  circus.  Even  to  contem- 
plate such  a  prospect  was  intolerable ;  still  more,  and  as 
though  Caius  deliberately  designed  to  add  insult  to  injury, 
he  proposed  to  bestow  the  franchise  upon  all  the  freemen  of 
Italy.  This  would  be  only  to  cut  down  in  an  unknown  ratio 
the  value  of  the  votes  of  those  who  now  possessed  the  fran 
chise.  Such  a  calamity  as  that  never  could  be  borne.  The 
course  of  the  Senate  might  have  been  one  of  misrule,  but 
this  of  Caius  Gracchus  was  fast  developing  into  unbearable 
despotism.  The  election  day  came,  riots  were  raised,  and 
Caius  Gracchus  and  three  thousand  of  his  friends  were  killed, 
as  had  been  his  brother  and  his  friends  ten  years  before. 

The  mob  having  now  no  leader,  the  Senate  resumed  its 
sway  as  before,  and  went  on  in  the  same  old  way,  except 
that  the  laws  actually  passed  by  Caius  had  to  stand.  It  was 
not  long,  however,  before  the  Senate  was  put  to  a  test  which 


30  TEE  LAST  DATS  OF  THE  REPUBLIC. 

effectually  exposed  its  utter  incompetency  to  rule  the  Roman 
State.  West  of  the  Carthaginian  province  of  Rome,  lay  the 
kingdom  of  Numidia,  over  which  the  Roman  power  extended 
its  protectorate.  Miscipsa  was  king.  He  had  two  sons, 
Hiempsal  and  Adherbal,  and  an  illegitimate  nephew,  Jugur- 
tha.  Miscipsa  died  B.  c.  118,  and  left  his  kingdom  jointly 
to  the  three  young  men.  Jugurtha  at  once  murdered  Hiemp- 
sal, and  attacked  Adherbal.  Adherbal  appealed  to  Rome, 
but  Jugurtha  had  already  made  himself  safe  with  the  Senate. 
The  Senate  sent  out  commissioners,  Jugurtha  bribed  them, 
and  they  went  home  again.  Jugurtha  pushed  the  war, 
Adherbal  was  taken,  and  was  killed  after  having  been  tort- 
ured almost  to  death.  After  the  capture  of  Adherbal  and  his 
forces,  some  Roman  citizens  had  also  been  taken,  and  after 
their  surrender,  they  too  were  killed.  This  raised  such  a 
cry  at  Rome  that  the  Senate  was  compelled  at  least  to  prom- 
ise an  investigation  ;  but  as  no  results  were  to  be  seen,  one 
of  the  tribunes  openly  told  the  people  that  there  were  men 
in  the  Senate  who  were  bribed.  At  this  the  popular  indig- 
nation began  to  show  itself  so  strongly  that  the  Senate  dared 
no  longer  to  brave  it,  and  declared  war  on  Jugurtha.  An 
army  was  sent  to  Africa  in  command  of  a  consul.  Jugurtha 
bribed  the  consul,  and  secured  a  peace  on  the  payment  of  a 
small  fine.  Memmius,  the  same  tribune  who  before  had  the 
courage  openly  to  charge  the  Senate  with  taking  bribes,  again 
openly  exposed  in  the  Forum  this  last  piece  of  rascality. 
The  Senate  saw  the  storm  gathering,  and  once  more  bestirred 
itself  to  the  extent  of  calling  Jugurtha  to  Rome.  This  was 
only  to  increase  the  opportunities  of  both  Jugurtha  and  them- 
selves. Jugurtha  came  laden  with  gold,  and  in  addition  to 
the  Senate  which  he  already  owned,  he  bribed  every  one  of 
the  tribunes,  except  Memmius,  who  was  proof  against  all  his 
blandishments.  Jugurtha  had  been  called  to  Rome  under  a 
safe-conduct,  and  he  was  at  last  ordered  back  home,  but  the 
cause  was  not  yet  settled.  The  Senate  sent  over  another 
army.  But  Rome  had  as  yet  no  standing  army,  and  there 


THE  CONSULSHIP  OF  MARIUS.  31 

had  now  been  peace  so  long  that  the  old  military  discipline 
of  the  citizens  had  completely  run  down.  The  men  who 
were  enlisted  were  wholly  ignorant  of  military  duty,  and  the 
officers,  appointed  mostly  from  among  the  rich  young  nobles, 
were  more  illy  prepared  for  war  than  were  the  men.  The 
army  went  to  Africa,  arid  in  about  two  months  the  half  of  it 
was  destroyed,  and  the  other  half  captured,  by  Jugurtha. 
About  the  same  time,  two  armies  were  destroyed  by  the 
Gauls  up  on  the  Rhone.  ' '  While  the  great  men  at  Rome 
were  building  palaces,  inventing  new  dishes,  and  hiring 
cooks  at  unheard-of  salaries,  the  barbarians  were  at  the  gates 
of  Italy." — Fronde* 

This  combination  of  disgraces  and  dangers  gave  such 
force  to  the  popular  complaints  against  the  Senate,  that  it 
was  at  last  aroused  to  a  determination  really  to  do  something, 
and  the  best  man  that  could  be  found  —  Csecilius  Metellus  — 
was  appointed  to  lead  a  new  expedition  against  Jugurtha. 
Metellus  having  it  in  mind  to  put  an  end  to  the  Jugurthine 
War,  chose  as  his  second  in  command  the  ablest  general 
that  he  could  find,  Cains  Marius.  Arrived  in  Numidia,  the 
Roman  army  was  successful  in  several  battles,  and  Jugurtha 
asked  for  peace  ;  but  as  Metellus  demanded  unconditional 
surrender,  and  could  not  be  bribed,  Jugurtha  drew  his  forces 
into  the  desert,  and  caused  the  war  to  drag  along.  As  the 
time  for  the  election  of  a  consul  for  the  next  year  drew  on, 
Marius's  name  was  mentioned  as  the  candidate  of  the  people. 
It  was  the  law  that  the  candidate  must  be  present  at  the 
election,  and  Marius  obtained  the  consent  of  Metellus  to  go 
to  Rome.  Election  day  came,  B.  c.  107",  and  although  the 
aristocracy  did  all  they  could  to  defeat  him,  Marius  was 
elected — the  first  instance  in  a  hundred  years  in  which  a 
consul  had  been  chosen  from  the  people.  Metellus  was  re- 
called, and  Marius  was  given  sole  command  in  the  war  with 
Jugurtha.  He  first  set  on  foot  a  thorough  reorganization  of 
the  military  power  of  Rome.  Up  to  this  time,  the  Roman 
armies  had  been  but  a  militia  —  citizens  called  from  their 

3  •/<*.,  chap,  iv,  par.  6. 


32  THE  LAST  DAYS  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

various  occupations  for  service  upon  emergency,  and  return 
ing  to  their  occupations  as  soon  as  the  occasion  was  past 
which  made  their  services  necessary.  Harms  enlisted  men 
to  become  professional  soldiers.  These  he  thoroughly  drilled, 
and  reduced  to  the  strictest  discipline.  Thus  originated  the 
standing  army  of  Rome,  which  out  of  the  corruptions  of  the 
times  at  last  arose  to  a  military  despotism.  With  such  an 
army  of  well  trained  and  well  disciplined  troops,  Marius, 
before  the  next  year  was  ended,  had  brought  the  Jugurthine 
War  to  a  triumphant  close,  and  Jugurtha  himself  was 
brought  in  chains  to  Rome. 

Marius  had  barely  ended  the  trouble  in  Numidia,  before 
all  his  skill  and  all  the  valor  of  his  well  trained  legions, 
were  urgently  demanded  to  turn  back  the  tide  of  barbarians, 
—  Cimbri  and  Teutons, —  which  in  two  mighty  streams  of 
hundreds  of  thousands  each,  was  pouring  into  Italy.  While 
Marius  was  in  Africa,  the  largest  army  that  Rome  had  ever 
sent  against  an  enemy,  was  by  these  savages  swept  out  of 
existence,  B.  c.  107.  But  although  the  generalship  of  Marius 
was  now  urgently  needed  —  B.  c.  104  —  his  consulship  had 
expired,  and  there  was  no  precedent  for  electing  the  same 
person  consul  a  second  time.  In  times  of  imminent  danger 
it  was  in  the  province  of  the  Senate  to  suspend  the  constitu- 
tion, declare  the  State  in  danger,  and  appoint  a  dictator. 
But  as  Marius  was  the  favorite  of  the  populace,  it  was  known 
by  all  that  should  the  Senate  exercise  its  prerogative,  it 
would  never  appoint  him  as  the  dictator  ;  and  it  was  also 
known  by  all  that  Marius  was  the  only  man  who  could  save 
the  State.  Therefore,  the  people  took  the  power  into  their 
own  hands  again,  and  virtually  suspended  the  constitution  by 
electing  Marius  consul  the  second  time,  B.  c.  104. 

The  barbarians,  however,  did  not  come  at  once  into  Italy. 
By  some  cause  their  erratic  course  was  turned  aside,  and 
they  swept  through  southern  Gaul,  across  the  Pyrenees  into 
Spain,  over  northern  Spain  to  the  Atlantic,  up  the  coast  into 
Gaul  again,  across  Gaul  to  the  Seine  and  even  to  the  Rhine  ; 


MORE  STATE   CHARITY  AND    THE  SOCIAL    WAR.     33 

and  then  gathering  fresh  force  from  their  brethren  from  the 
wilds  of  Germany,  the  torrent  rolled  once  more  toward  Italy. 
In  this  wild  raid  two  years  were  consumed.  In  Rome  the 
people  still  held  sway,  and  Marius  was  elected  consul  a  third 
time,  and  even  a  fourth  time.  He  put  the  two  years  to  good 
use  in  perfecting  the  efficiency  of  his  legions,  and  drawing 
them  up  to  the  borders  of  Italy.  He  met  the  Teutons  even 
beyond  the  Alps,  and  annihilated  the  whole  host,  July  20, 
B.  c.  102.  The  Cimbri  by  another  route  passed  the  Alps  and 
forced  back  as  far  as  the  Po,  the  legions  under  Catulus. 
Marius,  in  his  absence,  was  elected  consul  the  fifth  time, 
and  continued  in  command.  He  came  to  the  rescue  of 
Catulus.  The  Cimbri  were  utterly  destroyed  (B.  c.  101, 
summer),  and  Italy  was  saved.  Marius  was  the  idol  of  the 
people  ;  they  prided  themselves  upon  saving  the  country  by 
him,  and  they  elected  him  consul  the  sixth  time,  B.  c.  100. 
But  Rome  was  no  sooner  free  once  more  from  the  danger 
of  a  foreign  foe,  than  by  civil  strife  and  political  violence 
she  began  to  prey  again  upon  her  own  vitals.  Besides 
Marius,  the  two  favorites  of  the  people  just  at  this  time  were 
Saturninus,  a  tribune,  and  Glaucia,  a  praetor.  With  these 
Marius  allied  himself.  They  were  all  powerful,  and  passed, 
(1)  another  land  law  dividing  up  portions  of  the  public  do- 
main among  the  veterans  of  Marius  ;  (2)  a  law  establishing 
colonies  in  Sicily,  Achaia,  and  Macedonia  ;  (3)  a  law  reduc- 
ing as  low  as  two  cents  a  peck,  the  price  of  wheat  from  the 
public  granaries  ;  and,  (4)  to  cap  it  all,  they  passed  a  vote 
that  all  the  senators  should  take  an  oath  to  execute  these 
laws  under  penalty  of  fine  and  expulsion  from  the  Senate. 
All  this  was  done  in  the  midst  of  riot,  tumult,  and  bloodshed. 
Metellus  alone,  of  all  the  senators,  refused  to  take  the  oath 
to  execute  these  laws.  Saturninus  had  him  dragged  out  of 
the  Senate  house  and  expelled  from  the  city.  Yet  there  was 
not  entire  harmony  in  the  popular  party.  There  were  rival 
candidates  and  consequent  jealousies.  Saturninus  and  Glaucia 
were  in  the  full  tide  of  success,  and  would  brook  no  rivals. 


34  THE  LAST  DATS   OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

Memmius  stood  for  the  consulship  at  the  same  time  that 
Glaucia  was  a  candidate  for  that  office.  As  it  appeared 
that  Memmius  would  be  elected,  he  was  murdered.  At  this, 
both  Saturninus  and  Glaucia  were  declared  public  enemies. 
They  took  refuge  in  the  capitol,  and  barricaded  it.  The 
aristocrats  laid  siege  to  them ;  Marius  interceded,  and  they 
surrendered  to  him.  They  were  confined  in  an  apartment  of 
the  Senate  house  to  be  held  for  trial.  The  aristocrats  tore 
off  the  roof,  and  pelted  them  to  death  with  stones  and  tiles. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  in  the  tribunate  of  Caius 
Gracchus  —  B.  c.  123  —  the  corruption  of  justice  by  the  sena- 
tors had  made  it  necessary  to  deprive  them  of  the  right  to 
sit  on  juries,  and  that  this  privilege  was  bestowed  upon  the 
knights.  Yet  within  about  thirty  years  the  same  evil  had 
grown  to  such  a  height  among  the  knights  as  to  call  loudly 
for  a  reform.  Accordingly,  in  B.  c.  91,  Marcus  Divius 
Drusus,  a  tribune,  brought  forward  a  proposal  to  reform  the 
law  courts,  and  thereby  incurred  the  deadly  enmity  of  the 
whole  Equestrian  order.  With  this  he  proposed  both  new 
land  laws  and  new  corn  laws,  which  increased  the  hatred  of 
the  senatorial  order  toward  the  populace.  These  laws  were 
passed,  but  the  Senate  declared  them  null  and  void.  Drusus 
had  also  entered  into  negotiations  with  the  Italians  to  secure 
for  them  Roman  citizenship.  He  was  denounced  in  the 
Senate  house  as  a  traitor,  and  on  his  way  home  was  assas- 
sinated. 

The  Italians  seeing  their  last  hope  was  gone,  rose  in 
rebellion,  and  set  about  to  form  a  new  State  of  their  own  to 
be  called  Italia.  They  had  long  borne  an  equal  share  in  the 
burdens  of  the  State  ;  they  had  helped  to  subdue  Jugurtha, 
and  had  borne  an  important  part  in  the  defeat  of  the  barba- 
rian host.  They  were  now  determined  that  if  they  were  to 
bear  an  equal  share  in  the  burdens  of  the  State,  they  would 
have  a  voice,  too,  in  the  affairs  of  the  State ;  and  if  they 
could  not  have  it  in  the  Roman  State,  they  would  have  it  in 
one  of  their  own.  Rome  was  determined  not  to  allow  this 


REVOLT  IN  THE  EAST.  35 

if  she  could  avoid  it.  But  in  the  war  which  followed,  the 
first  campaigns  were  disastrous  to  the  Roman  arms,  and 
although  some  successes  were  afterwards  gained,  they  were 
not  decisive  ;  she  soon  found  her  treasury  empty,  and  found 
disaffection  springing  up  in  districts  that  had  not  revolted. 
Drusus  had  been  murdered  in  91 ;  the  war  for  the  franchise 
immediately  followed,  and  Rome's  dangers  and  distresses 
became  so  threatening  that  in  the  latter  part  of  the  year  90, 
a  law  was  passed  granting  the  franchise  to  all  the  Italian 
communities  which  should  within  sixty  days  hand  in  their 
names  to  the  praetor  in  Rome ;  and  a  third  law  was  passed 
shortly  afterward  empowering  the  Roman  magistrates  in  the 
field  to  bestow  the  franchise  upon  all  who  would  receive  it. 
In  this  way  the  forces  of  the  insurgents  were  so  weakened 
that  the  war  was  soon  closed. 

The  close  of  war  in  the  field  was  only  the  signal  ,for  the 
renewal  of  strife  in  the  political  arena  of  the  city.  All  the 
old  quarrels  were  renewed  with  increased  bitterness,  and 
the  lately  enfranchised  Italians  were  a  new  element  in  the 
strife.  Their  voting  power  was  incorporated  with  that  of 
tribes  already  existing,  which  was  only  to  rob  them  of  a 
large  share  of  the  value  of  their  votes.  This  made  them 
discontented  from  the  very  beginning.  Added  to  all  the 
bitterness  of  factions,  and  the  rivalries  of  all  classes  who 
had  any  political  power  at  all,  there  was  now  wide-spread 
distress  and  ruin  that  affected  all  classes.  And  besides  all 
this,  Mithradates,  king  of  Pontus,  taking  advantage  of  the 
social  war  in  Italy,  had  set  out  to  reduce  all  the  East  in  sub- 
jection to  himself.  The  Roman  governors  had  made  such  a 
tyrannical  use  of  their  power  that  all  the  provinces  of  the 
"East  were  ready  to  revolt  at  the  first  fair  opportunity  that 
offered.  The  fleets  of  Mithradates,  coming  out  over  the 
Black  Sea,  poured  through  the  Hellespont  and  the  Darda- 
nelles into  the  Grecian  Archipelago.  All  the  islands,  and 
the  provinces  of  Ionia,  Caria,  and  Lydia,  taking  advantage 
of  this,  rose  at  once  in  determined  revolt,  and  put  to  death 


36  THE  LAST  DATS   OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

many  thousands  of  the  Roman  residents.  Not  only  the  gov- 
ernors, but  the  merchants,  the  bankers,  and  the  farmers  of 
the  taxes,  with  their  families,  were  promiscuously  murdered. 
Mithradates  himself,  with  a  powerful  army,  followed 
close  upon  the  success  of  his  fleet,  crossed  the  Bosphorus, 
and  penetrated  into  Greece,  which  received  him  as  a  deliv- 
erer. All  this  compelled  Rome  to  declare  war  upon  Mith- 
radates ;  but  this  was  only  to  deepen  her  own  local  contests  ; 
because  there  was  bitter  rivalry  and  contention  as  to  who 
should  command  the  armies  to  be  sent  against  Mithradates. 
Marius  was  still  a  great  favorite,  but  there  was  now  a  strong 
rival  to  his  popularity  in  the-  person  of  Lucius  Cornelius 
Sulla.  Sulla  had  been  one  of  Marius's  best  assistants  in 
putting  an  end  to  the  Jugurthine  "War,  and  also  in  defeating 
the  Teutons  and  the  Cimbri.  He  made  himself  the  favorite 
of  the  soldiers  by  allowing  them  to  indulge  "in  plundering 
and  in  all  kinds  of  license. "  Before  the  social  war  he  had 
already  made  one  journey  into  the  East  with  an  army,  had 
defeated  one  of  «the  generals  of  Mithradates,  had  restored, 
for  a  time,  order  in  the  Eastern  provinces,  and  had  received 
an  embassy  from  the  Parthians,  which  was  sent  to  solicit  an 
alliance  with  Rome,  B.  c.  92.  He  returned  to  Rome  in  91, 
and  both  he  and  Marius  were  given  command  in  the  war 
with  the  Italians.  Sulla's  success  was  more  marked  than 
that  of  Marius,  and  there  were  not  those  lacking  who  would 
stir  up  jealousy  between  the  two  commanders  by  claiming 
that  Marius's  success  against  Jugurtha  and  the  barbarians 
was  more  owing  to  the  abilities  of  Sulla  than  to  his  own. 
Sulla  was  one  of  the  aristocracy,  —  "a  patrician  of  the  pur- 
est blood,"  —  but  he  had  made  an  immense  bid  for  the  favor 
of  the  populace  by  exhibiting  in  the  arena  a  hundred  African 
lions. 

t  Everybody  in  Rome,  and,  for  that  matter,  in  all  Italy, 
knew  that  the  contest  for  the  command  of  the  troops  in  the 
Mithradatic  War,  lay  between  Marius  and  Sulla  ;  and  every 
one  knew  that  the  contest  stood,  Sulla  and  the  senatorial 


BLOODY  STRIPES  IN  THE  CITY.  37 

party  against  Marius  and  the  people.  The  contest  deepened, 
and  it  was  more  and  more  evident  that,  in  the  existing  state 
of  things,  it  could  not  be  decided  without  a  crisis.  A  trib- 
une —  Sulpicius  Rufus  —  proposed  for  adoption  a  series 
of  laws  :  (1)  that  Marius  should  be  given  command  in  the 
Mithradatic  War  ;  (2)  that  more  power  should  be  given  to 
the  newly-made  citizens  and  more  value  to  their  votes,  by 
increasing  the  number  of  tribes,  and  distributing  the  new 
citizens  through  all  the  tribes  ;  (3)  that  any  senator  who 
was  in  debt  more  than  2000  denarii  (about  $300),  should 
lose  his  seat  ;  (4)  and  that  those  who  had  been  banished  on 
suspicion  of  having  encouraged  the  Italian  revolt  should  be 
recalled. 

These  proposals  only  made  the  confusion  of  parties  worse 
confounded.  The  proposal  to  give  Marius  the  command 
pleased  the  great  majority  of  the  people  ;  that  in  favor  of 
the  new  citizens,  secured  the  influence  of  all  these,  but  the 
proposal  to  increase  the  power  of  their  votes  was  bitterly  op- 
posed by  the  old  voters,  because  it  would  lessen  the  value  of 
their  own  votes.  The  proposal  to  unseat  such  of  the  sena- 
tors as  should  come  within  the  provisions  of  the  law,  was 
only  to  raise  the  whole  Senate  to  war  by  attempting  to  cur- 
tail its  power  ;  and  again,  the  proposal  in  favor  of  Marius 
only  aroused  both  the  Senate  and  Sulla  to  the  most  deter- 
mined opposition.  But  through  it  all  it  soon  became  evident 
that  Rufus  would  carry  his  whole  scheme.  The  consuls,— 
Sulla  was  one  of  them,  —  to  prevent  the  legislation,  pro- 
claimed the  day  a  public  holiday.  Rufus  armed  his  party 
and  drove  the  consuls  from  the  Forum,  compelled  them  to 
withdraw  the  proclamation  of  a  holiday,  and  carried  his  laws. 
But  Sulla  put  himself  at  the  head  of  his  soldiers  and  marched 
them  into  the  city,  and  ' '  for  the  first  time  a  Roman  consul 
entered  the  city  of  Rome  at  the  head  of  the  legions  of  the 
republic."  There  was  resistance,  but  it  was  utterly  vain. 
Marius  escaped  to  Africa,.  Rufus  was  taken  and  killed,  and 
twelve  others  of  the  popular  leaders  put  to  death  without  a 


38  THE  LAST  DATS  OF   TEE  REPUBLIC. 

trial.  Sulla,  at  the  head  of  his  troops  and  supported  by  the 
Senate,  settled  affairs  to  suit  himself,  and  with  his  legions 
departed  for  the  East  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  87"  B.  c. 

Sulla  was  no  sooner  well  out  of  Italy  than  one  of  the 
consuls  —  Cinna  —  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  people,  and 
proposed  to  carry  out  the  laws  of  Kufus.  The  new  citizens 
had  assembled  in  crowds  to  exercise  their  right  of  voting. 
The  other  consul,  standing  for  Sulla  and  the  Senate,  brought 
out  an  armed  force,  and  commanded  the  assembled  voters  to 
disperse  ;  and  because  they  refused,  they  were  hewn  down 
where  they  stood,  and  "  the  Forum  was  heaped  high  with  the 
bodies  of  the  slain."  "  Such  a  scene  of  slaughter  had  never 
been  witnessed  in  Rome  since  the  first  stone  of  the  city  was 
laid."  —  Fronde.™  Cinna  and  the  tribunes  fled,  but  it  was 
to  gather  together  the  soldiers  as  Sulla  had  done  before 
them.  Marius,  too,  returned  with  a  thousand  cavalry  from 
Numidia,  and  he  had  no  sooner  stepped  ashore  in  Italy  than 
he  was  joined  by  five  thousand  of  his  veterans,  and  with  his 
six  thousand  men  he  united  with  Cinna  at  the  gates  of  Rome. 
The  Senate  had  made  preparations  for  a  vigorous  defense, 
and,  in  order  to  prevent  the  threatened  attack,  issued  proc- 
lamations, making  every  concession,  and  granting  every 
privilege  that  had  been  demanded.  But  all  was  to  no  pur- 
pose. They  could  not  be  trusted.  Marius  and  Cinna 
pressed  forward,  and  after  a  brief  resistance,  the  city  was 
surrendered,  and  the  two  generals  entered  with  their  troops. 
A  fearful  massacre  followed.  Fifty  senators  and  a  thou- 
sand knights  were  slain,  besides  great  numbers  of  their  par- 
tisans, and  for  many  days  the  city  was  given  up  to  a  reign 
of  terror.  These  were  the  last  days  of  the  year  87  B.  c. 
Marius  died  January  13,  86.  Cinna,  supported  by  his  troops, 
became  virtually  dictator,  and  ruled  Rome  for  three  years. 

Sulla  was  everywhere  successful  against  Mithradates, 
and  in  the  year  84  a  peace  was  concluded,  in  which  Mith- 
radates was  reduced  to  the  position  of  a  vassal  of  Rome. 

10  Id.,  chap,  vii,  par.  8. 


DICTATORSHIP  OF  SULLA.  39 

In  83  Sulla  determined  to  return  to  Italy,  which  under 
Cinna's  rule  had  been  almost  entirely  turned  against  him. 
The  Italians  dreaded  to  have  Sulla  return,  and  Cinna  started 
to  go  into  Greece  with  his  forces  to  meet  Sulla  there,  but  his 
troops  mutinied  and  killed  him,  and  Sulla  was  in  a  short  time 
landed  in  Italy  with  40,000  veteran  troops,  who  had  not  yet 
known  defeat.  Sulla  was  joined  by  Pompey  with  a  legion 
which  he  had  raised.  .The  defeat  of  Cinna  had  dissolved 
the  unity  of  the  parties  in  Italy,  yet  it  took  Sulla  about 
a  year  to  bring  all  the  country  into  subjection.  As  soon 
as  he  had  made  his  position  secure,  he  entered  upon  a  course 
of  continuous  and  systematic  murder  of  all  who  had  in  any 
way  given  support  to  Cinna  or  Marius.  He  had  the  Senate 
to  appoint  him  dictator,  which  made  him  master  of  every- 
thing and  everybody  in  Italy. 

"  He  at  once  outlawed  every  magistrate,  every  public 
servant  of  any  kind,  civil  or  muncipal,  who  had  held  office 
under  the  rule  of  Cinna.  Lists  were  drawn  for  him  of  the 
persons  of  wealth  and  consequence  all  over  Italy  who  be- 
longed to  the  liberal  party.  He  selected  agents  whom  he 
could  trust,  or  supposed  he  could  trust,  to  enter  the  names 
for  each  district.  He  selected,  for  instance,  Oppianicus  of 
Larino,  who  inscribed  individuals  whom  he  had  already 
murdered,  and  their  relations  whose  prosecution  he  feared. 
It  mattered  little  to  Sylla n  who  were  included,  if  none  es- 
caped who  were  really  dangerous  to  him  ;  and  an  order  was 
issued  for  the  slaughter  of  the  entire  number,  the  confisca- 
tion of  their  property,  and  the  division  of  it  between  the  in- 
formers and  Sylla's  friends  and  soldiers.  Private  interest 
was  thus  called  in  to  assist  political  animosity ;  and  to 
stimulate  the  zeal  for  assassination,  a  reward  of  5001  was 
offered  for  the  head  of  any  person  whose  name  was  in 
the  schedule.  .  .  .  Four  thousand  seven  hundred  persons 


11  Froude  uses  the  spelling  "  Sylla  "  instead  of  "  Sulla."  I  have  preferred 
the  latter  form.  It  is  that  used  by  Merivale,  Mommsen,  and  the  "  Encyclopedia 
Britannica." 


40  THE  LAST  DATS   OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

fell  in  the  proscription  of  Sylla,  all  men  of  education  and 
fortune.  The  real  crime  of  many  of  them  was  the  posses- 
sion of  an  estate  or  a  wife  which  a  relative  or  a  neighbor 
coveted.  The  crime  alleged  against  all  was  the  opinion  that 
the  people  of  Home  and  Italy  had  rights  which  deserved 
consideration  as  well  as  the  senators  and  nobles.  The 
liberal  party  were  extinguished  in  their  own  blood.  Their 
estates  were  partitioned  into  a  hundred  and  twenty  thousand 
allotments,  which  were  distributed  among  Sylla's  friends, 
or  soldiers,  or  freedmen.  The  laud  reform  of  the  Gracchi 
was  mockingly  adopted  to  create  a  permanent  aristocratic 
garrison.  There  were  no  trials,  there  were  no  pardons. 
Common  report  or  private  information  was  at  once  in- 
dictment and  evidence,  and  accusation  was  in  itself  con- 
demnation. "  —  Froude.™ 

Reform  was  popular,  and  Sulla  must  needs  be  a  reformer  ; 
but  his  was  a  reformation  which  aimed  to  make  the  Senate 
both  supreme  and  absolute.  He  had  already,  while  consul 
in  88,  crippled  the  power  of  both  the  tribunes  and  the  peo- 
ple, by  passing  a  law  that  no  proposal  should  be  made  to 
the  assembly  without  the  sanction  of  the  Senate  ;  and  now 
the  value  of  the  office  of  tribune  was  lowered  by  the  pro- 
vision that  any  one  who  should  become  a  tribune  should 
never  afterward  be  chosen  to  any  other  office.  In  an- 
other form,  also,  he  lessened  the  power  of  the  people  ;  he 
enacted  a  law  that  no  man  shouM  be  elected  consul  who 
was  not  forty-three  years  old,  and  who  had  not  already 
been  a  praetor  or  a  quaestor,  and  that  no  one  should  be 
made  consul  a  second  time  within  ten  years.  He  also  took 
entirely  away  from  the  knights  the  right  of  sitting  as  the 
court  of  justice,  and  restored  to  the  Senate  this  privilege. 
As  in  the  matter  of  the  election  of  tribunes  and  consuls  he 
had  so  far  deprived  the  people  of  the  exercise  of  their 
power,  he  now  went  farther,  and  enacted  a  law  that  the 
assembly  of  the  people  should  not  even  be  called  together 
without  the  Senate's  sanction.  But  the  heaviest  stroke  of 

*'*  Id.,  chap,  viii,  par.  10,  13. 


POMPEY  THE  GREAT. 


SULLA,  POMPET,  AND   G^SAR.  41 

all  that  he  made  against  the  populace  was  to  abolish  en- 
tirely the  grants  of  grain,  and  to  shut  up  the  public 
granaries. 

Thus  the  power  of  the  Senate  was  made  absolute,  and  to 
render  it  secure,  ten  thousand  slaves  were  enfranchised  and 
formed  into  a  senatorial  guard.  But  in  the  existing  order 
of  things,  it  was  impossible  that  such  power  could  be  re- 
spected, or  that  it  could  long.be  exercised.  The  only  means 
by  which  Sulla  was  enabled  to  create  such  a  power  at  all, 
was  the  army  which  was  so  entirely  devoted  to  himself. 

From  this  time  .forth,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  it 
became  more  and  more  certain  that  the  army  would  be  the 
real  source  of  power ;  that  whosoever  should  have  the  sup- 
port of  the  strongest  body  of  troops  would  possess  the  power ; 
and  that  just  as  soon  as  that  power  should  be  turned  against 
the  Senate  instead  of  for  it,  all  this  system  which  had  been 
so  carefully  built  up  would  be  scarcely  more  tangible  than 
the  stuff  that  dreams  are  made  of.  Sulla  himself  had  set  the 
example  in  88,  it  had  been  readily  followed  by  Cinna  in  87, 
it  was  repeated  here  by  Sulla  in  81,  and  he  himself  saw  in 
Pompey  a  readiness  to  follow  it  this  same  year. 

Pompey  had  been  sent  to  Sicily  and  Africa  to  reduce 
things  to  order  there,  and  he  was  eminently  successful. 
When  he  had  completed  his  task,  he  was  ordered  by  the 
Senate  to  disband  his  troops.  He  refused,  and  Sulla  had  to 
smooth  the  matter  over  by  granting  him  a  triumph,  and 
allowing  him  to  assume  the  title  of  "the  Great,"  although 
he  was  only  about  twenty-five  years  of  age.  By  this  act  of 
Pompey's,  Sulla  saw  that  it  would  be  the  best  thing  to  do, 
to  bind  Pompey  securely  to  himself.  Pompey  was  already 
married  to  Antistia,  a  lady  whose  father  had  been  murdered 
for  standing  up  for  Sulla,  and  whose  mother  had  been  driven 
mad,  and  to  destroy  herself,  by  her  husband's  terrible  fate. 
But  Sulla  had  a  stepdaughter,  Emilia,  whom  he  proposed 
that  Pompey  should  marry.  Emilia  was  already  married, 
and  was  pregnant  at  the  time,  yet  at  Sulla's  invitation 

4 


42  THE  LAST  DAYS   OF    THE  REPUBLIC. 

Pompey  divorced  Antistia,  and  married  Emilia.  There  was 
just  then  another  youth  in  Rome  whom  it  was  to  Sulla's 
interest  to  gain  also,  and  he  proposed  to  secure  his  allegiance 
in  much  the  same  way  that  he  had  gained  Pompey's.  That 
youth  was  Julius  Caesar. 

Caesar  was  the  nephew  of  the  great  Marius,  and  had 
married  Cornelia,  the  daughter  of  Cinna,  by  whom  he  had  a 
daughter  named  Julia.  He  was  at  this  time  about  twenty 
years  of  age.  Sulla  proposed  to  him  that  he  should  divorce 
Cornelia,  and  marry  some  woman  whom  Sulla  should  choose. 
Caesar  flatly  refused.  Sulla  tried  to  compel  him  to  it :  he 
deprived  him  of  his  office  of  the  priesthood,  he  took  his 
wife's  dowry  from  him,  and  confiscated  his  estate.  But 
Caesar  would  not  yield  an  inch.  Next  Sulla  hired  assassins 
to  kill  him,  and  he  escaped  only  by  bribing  the  assassins. 
Caesar's  friends  interceded,  and  finally  obtained  his  pardon ; 
but  he,  not  willing  to  trust  himself  within  Sulla's  reach,  left 
Italy,  and  joined  the  army  in  Asia.  In  79  Sulla  resigned  his 
dictatorship,  and  died  the  following  year. 

The  power  which  Sulla  had  given  to  the  Senate  was  only 
used  to  build  up  itself.  As  no  election  could  be  had  with- 
out the  appointment  of  the  Senate,  the  elections  soon  fell 
under  the  control  of  senatorial  rings  and  committees,  and  no 
candidate  could  hope  to  succeed  who  had  not  the  favor  of 
the  Senate  ;  and  the  surest  means  of  securing  the  favor  of 
the  senatorial  party  was  the  possession  of  wealth,  and  a 
willingness  to  spend  it  to  secure  an  office. 

The  distribution  of  the  land  by  Sulla  had  worked  no  bet- 
ter than  had  that  by  the  Gracchi,  nor  in  fact  hardly  as  well  ; 
because  since  that  there  had  been  forty  years  of  degeneracy 
and  political  violence,  and  a  part  of  the  time  almost  anarchy. 
Extravagance  in  living  had  increased  at  a  rapid  rate  among 
all  classes :  among  the  really  wealthy,  in  an  ostentatious 
display,  or  the  exhaustion  of  pleasure  ;  among  those  of 
moderate  fortunes  in  an  effort  to  ape  the  ways  of  the  wealthy  ; 


JULIUS  CAESAR. 


POMPEY  AND   CRASS  US,  CONSULS.  43 

and  even  among  the  poor,  owing  to  the  virtually  free  distri- 
bution of  wheat.  For  so  long  as  they  could  get  the  main 
part  of  their  living  for  nothing,  they  were  not  likely  to  culti- 
vate habits  of  economy.  It  was  easy  enough  to  distribute 
land  to  those  who  had  neither  land  nor  money.  The  diffi- 
culty was  to  keep  it  so  distributed.  Those  to  whom  Sulla 
had  distributed  land,  especially  his  soldiers,  lived  far  beyond 
their  means  ;  their  lands  were  soon  mortgaged,  and  at  last 
forfeited,  falling  once  more  into  the  hands  of  the  wealthy 
land  owners,  to  be  worked  by  slaves,  while  the  free  citizens 
were  again  crowded  into  the  cities.  Besides  the  vast  num- 
bers of  slaves  who  were  put  to  use  on  farms  and  in  shops  all 
over  Italy,  there  were  many- who  were  kept  and  trained  to 
fight  one  another  in  the  amphitheater,  solely  for  the  amuse- 
ment of  the  populace.  Nothing  made  a  person  so  popular 
as  to  set  forth  a  few  pairs  of  gladiators  in  the  circus  to  mur- 
der one  another.  At  Capua,  about  seventy-five  miles  south 
of  Rome,  was  the  most  famous  training-school  for  gladiators. 
In  the  year  73  B.  c.,  two  hundred  of  these  gladiators,  led  by 
Spartacus,  broke  away  from  their  "stables"  in  Capua,  and 
were  soon  joined  by  escaped  slaves  from  all  the  surrounding 
country,  in  such  numbers  that  in  a  little  while  Spartacus 
found  himself  at  the  head  of  TO,  000  men  ready  for  any  sort 
of  desperate  action.  For  two  years  they  spread  terror  from 
one  end  of  Italy  to  the  other,  till  Pompey  and  Crassus  led 
forth  an  army,  and  annihilated  the  whole  host,  B.  c.  71. 
Spartacus  was  killed,  sword  in  hand,  and  6,000  captives  were 
crucified  all  along  the  highway  from  Capua  to  Rome. 

Pompey  and  Crassus  were  made  consuls  for  the  year  70, 
Sulla's  legislation  was  undone,  and  everything  set  back  as  it 
was  before,  except  that  the  prerogative  of  sitting  as  a  court 
of  law  was  not  restored  entirely  to  the  knights.  This  privi- 
lege the  senators  had  again  prostituted  to  their  old  purposes, 
and  as  the  knights  could  not  be  fully  trusted  either,  the  court 
was  now  to  be  composed  of  two-thirds  knights  and  one-third 


44  THE  LAST  DATS   OF  THE  RE PUBLIC. 

senators.  The  power  of  the  tribunes  was  fully  restored,  also 
the  right  of  the  populace  to  assemble  at  their  own  wish. 
The  public  granaries  were  once  more  opened.  The  mob  was 
happy,  the  Senate  was  embittered,  and  the  way  was  again 
opened  for  the  full  tide  of  political  violence  which  imme- 
diately followed. 

Caesar  was  now  fast  becoming  popular.  He  and  Bibulus 
had  been  elected  aediles  for  the  year  65,  the  office  of  which 
was  to  take  charge  of  the  public  buildings  and  the  games 
and  theaters.  "They  were  expected  to  decorate  the  city 
with  new  ornaments,  and  to  entertain  the  people  with  mag- 
nificent spectacles."  Caesar  acquitted  himself  so  well  in  this 
as  to  make  himself  the  favorite  of  the  whole  multitude  of 
the  people.  Then  as  he  felt  his  influence  becoming  more 
firmly  established,  he  set  on  foot  an  inquiry  into  the  pro- 
scription that  had  been  carried  on  by  Sulla.  A  committee 
of  investigation  was  appointed,  of  which  Caesar  himself  was 
made  chairman.  At  the  time  when  the  roof  of  the  Senate 
house  had  been  torn  off,  and  Saturninus  and  Glaucia  were 
pelted  to  death  with  tiles,  in  Saturninus,  the  father  of  Titus 
Labienus  had  been  killed.  One  of  those  engaged  in  the 
massacre  at  the  time  was  Rabirius,  and  although  he  was  now 
a  very  old  man,  Labienus  prosecuted  him  before  Caesar's 
committee  for  the  murder  of  his  father.  Rabirius  was  con- 
victed, but  he  appealed  to  the  people,  who  could  not  see 
their  way  clear  to  convict  him  of  a  guilt  that  was  common  to 
the  whole  aristocracy  ;  and  although  he  was  acquitted,  they 
chose  to  show  to  the  senatorial  party  that  it  was  out  of  no 
respect  to  them.  The  people  decided  to  make  Caesar  the 
head  of  religion  by  electing  him  to  the  office  of  Pontifex 
Maxirnus,  which  became  vacant  just  at  this  time.  This  was 
the  greatest  honor  that  could  come  to  a  Roman  citizen.  The 
office  was  for  life,  and  until  now  had  always  been  held  by 
members  of  the  aristocracy,  and  Sulla  had  sought  to  confine 
it  exclusively  to  these  by  giving  to  the  sacred  college  the 


LAND  MONOPOLY  AND  ANTI-POVERTY  REFORM.       45 

privilege  of  electing  its  own  chief.  Labienus  being  tribune, 
had  succeeded  in  carrying  a  vote  in  the  assembly  by  which 
this  privilege  was  resumed  by  the  people.  To  fill  the  va- 
cancy which  now  occurred,  two  of  the  aristocracy  were  pre- 
sented by  the  senatorial  party,  and  Caesar  was  nominated  by 
the  people.  Immense  sums  of  money  were  spent  by  the  sena- 
torial party  to  buy  sufficient  votes  to  elect  one  or  the  other 
of  their  two  candidates.  Caesar  likewise  spent  money  freely, 
although  deeply  in  debt  already.  When  he  left  home  for 
the  Forum  on  the  morning  of  the  election  day,  and  his  mother 
kissed  him  good-by,  he  told  her  he  would  either  come  home 
Pontifex  Maximus  or  would  not  come  home  at  all.  Such  an 
extreme  alternative,  however,  was  not  necessary,  because  he 
was  elected  by  a  vote  larger  than  that  of  both  the  other  can- 
didates put  together.  This  was  in  the  year  63,  arid  soon 
afterward  Caesar  was  elected  praetor  for  the  next  year. 

The  land  monopoly  had  again  become  as  notorious  as  at 
any  time  before.  The  small  proprietors  had  sold  out,  and 
large  holdings  had  increased,  until  the  land  had  fallen  into 
a  few  hands,  and  Rome  was  crowded  with  a  rabble  of  poor 
citizens  largely  fed  at  public  expense.  Against  the  will  of 
the  Senate,  and  by  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  people, 
Pompey  had  been  sent,  B.  c.  72,  to  the  East  against  Mithra- 
dates,  who  had  again  strongly  asserted  his  power.  Pompey 
was  victorious  everywhere,  and  his  conquests  in  the  East 
had  brought  to  the  State  large  quantities  of  land,  and  his 
honest  conduct  in  these  affairs  had  filled  the  treasury  with 
money.  Here  was  a  grand  opportunity  for  reform.  Rullus, 
a  tribune,  brought  forward  a  proposition  that  part  of  the  ter- 
ritory acquired  by  Pompey  should  be  sold,  and  the  money 
used  to  buy  land  in  Italy  upon  which  to  settle  poor  citizens 
from  Rome.  Cicero,  as  consul,  opposed  it  strenuously.  He 
railed  on  Rullus  with  all  the  bitterness  his  abusive  tongue  could 
utter.  Rullus  had  stated  that  the  populace  of  Rome  was  be- 
come so  powerful  as  to  be  dangerous,  and  that  for  the  good 


46  THE  LAST  DAY 8  OF   THE  REPUBLIC. 

of  the  State  it  would  be  proper  that  some  should  be  removed 
from  the  city,  and  placed  upon  lands  where  they  could  sup- 
port themselves.  This  was  all  true,  as  Cicero  well  knew ; 
yet  he  hesitated  not  a  moment  to  curry  favor  with  these,  by 
setting  it  before  them  in  as  objectionable  a  light  as  possible 
in  order  to  defeat  the  aim  of  Rullus.  Cicero  hated  the  in- 
fluence of  the  people  as  much  as  anybody  else  in  Rome,  but 
he  hated  Rullus's  proposition  more  because  it  would  lessen 
the  power  of  the  aristocracy,  whose  favor  he  just  now 
longed  for  more  than  for  anything  else  ;  he  therefore  pre- 
tended to  be  the  friend  of  the  people  and  to  be  defending 
them  against  the  ulterior  scheme  of  Rullus.  He  succeeded. 
Rullus's  bill  was  defeated,  and  his  plan  came  to  nothing. 
And  had  his  plan  even  succeeded  it  would  likewise  have 
come  to  nothing  ;  because  now  the  cry  had  become  popular 
and  was  becoming  more  and  more  imperative  —  ' '  Bread  for 
nothing,  and  games  forever  !  " 


ROME   MISTRESS   OF   THE   WORLD. 


CHAPTER    II. 


THE   TWO  TRIUMVIRATES. 

HTHE  senators  held  office  for  life,  and  therefore  the  Senate 
JL  was  always  in  possession  of  power ;  while  owing  to  the 
fact  that  the  elections  were  annual,  the  power  of  the  people 
was  but  spasmodic  at  the  best.  Whenever  some  extraordi- 
nary occasion,  or  some  leader  who  could  carry  the  multitude 
with  him,  arose,  the  people  would  awake  and  carry  every- 
thing before  them.  But  when  the  particular  occasion  was 
past,  or  the  leader  fallen,  the  people  would  drop  back  into 
the  old  easy  way,  though  there  was  scarcely  ever  an  election 
without  a  riot,  and  the.  Senate  would  gradually  regain  all  its 
former  power  ;  each  time  only  using  it  the  more  despotically, 
in  revenge  for  the  checks  which  had  been  put  upon  it,  and 
the  insults  which  it  had  received.  With  politics,  as  it  had 
universally  become,  it  was  inevitable  and  in  fact  essential, 
that  there  should  arise  a  power  constantly  active,  which 
should  balance  that  of  the  Senate,  and  hold  in  check  its  des- 
potic tendencies.  This  power,  as  had  already  appeared,  lay 
in  the  army.  But  the  army  must  be  led.  Consequently  the 
logic  of  the  situation  was  that  a  coalition  should  be  formed 
representing  the  different  classes  of  the  people,  but  depend- 
ing upon  the  army  for  support.  Such  a  coalition  was 
demanded  by  the  times  and  events,  and  was  actually  created 
in  B.  c.  60. 

Pompey's  work  was  done  in  the  East,  and  in  December 
62  B.  c.,  he  returned  to  Rome  to  display  and  enjoy  such  a 

[47] 


4:8  THE    TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

triumph  as  had  never  before  been  seen  on  earth.  A  long 
train  of  captive  princes  of  the  conquered  countries  as  trophies 
of  his  victories,  and  wagons  laden  with  all  manner  of  treas- 
ure as  an  offering  to  the  State,  followed  the  triumphant 
general  as  he  returned  to  the  capital.  A  triumphal  column 
was  erected  in  his  honor,  with  an  inscription  which  declared 
"that  Pompey,  'the  people's  general,'  had  in  three  years 
captured  fifteen  hundred  cities,  and  had  slain,  taken,  or 
reduced  to  submission  twelve  million  human  beings."  The 
offerings  which  lie  brought  filled  the  treasury  to  overflowing, 
and  the  income  from  the  countries  subdued  made  the  annual 
revenue  of  the  republic  double  what  it  had  been  before.  All 
this  was  lost  upon  the  Senate,  however,  except  to  deepen  its 
jealousy  of  Pompey.  By  a  special  vote,  indeed,  he  "was 
permitted  to  wear  his  triumphal  robe  in  the  Senate  as  often 
and  as  long  as  it  might  please  him  ; "  but  with  this  the 
Senate  proposed  that  favors  to  Pompey  should  cease. 

At  the  border  of  Italy  Pompey  had  disbanded  his  troops, 
and  he  entered  Rome  as  a  private  citizen,  with  only  his 
political  influence  to  sustain  him.  And  just  here  Pompey 
failed.  Although  he  was  every  inch  a  general,  he  was  no 
politician.  He  could  victoriously  wield  an  army,  but  he 
could  do  nothing  with  a  crowd.  He  could  command  legions, 
but  could  not  command  votes.  More  than  this,  during  his 
absence,  the  senatorial  party  had  employed  the  time  in 
strenuous  efforts  and  by  all  means  in  their  power,  to  destroy 
his  influence  in  the  city,  and  to  create  jealousy  and  distrust 
between  Caesar  and  Pompey.  When  Pompey  had  departed 
for  Asia,  it  was  with  the  friendship  of  Caesar,  whose  in- 
fluence had  helped  to  secure  his  appointment.  During 
Pompey's  absence,  Caesar's  influence  and  popularity  had 
constantly  increased  in  Rome.  He  held  the  people's  favor, 
and  Pompey  held  the  military  power.  The  senatorial  party 
decided,  if  possible,  to  divide  this  power  by  estranging 
Pompey  and  Caesar  from  one  another.  The  tale  was  carried 
to  Pompey  that  his  wife,  Mucia,  had  been  seduced  by  Caesar. 


THE  SENATE   OFFENDS   CJSSAK.  49 

This  accomplished  its  intended  purpose,  and  Pompey  di- 
vorced her.  Poinpey's  prompt  action  in  disbanding  his 
troops  at  the  border  of  Italy  had  relieved  the  Senate  from 
dread  of  his  military  power  ;  yet  Pornpey's  troops,  although 
disbanded,  and  of  no  force  as  a  military  power,  were  an 
important  element  in  the  elections,  so  long  as  Pompey  could 
retain  their  sympathies. 

Pompey  asked  that  his  acts  in  Asia  might  be  ratified, 
but  the  Senate  and  its  partisans,  though  not  openly  refusing 
to  do  so,  raised  so  many  questions  and  created  so  many 
delays  as  to  amount  in  effect  to  a  refusal.  He  also  asked 
that  public  lands  might  be  distributed  to  his  soldiers,  and 
this  also  was  so  successfully  opposed  as  to  defeat  him.  He 
then  attempted  to  gain  his  wishes  by  political  influence  and 
action.  By  the  free  use  of  money  he  secured  the  election 
of  both  the  consuls  for  the  year  60  B.  c. ;  but  he  was  disap- 
pointed in  both.  One  had  not  sense  enough  to  be  a  consul, 
and  the  other,  Metellus  Celer,  was  the  brother  of  Mucia, 
whom  Pompey  had  divorced,  and  under  pretense  had  only 
lent  himself  to  Pompey  in  order  to  take  revenge  for  the 
reproach  thus  cast  upon  his  sister.  Celer  immediately  went 
over  to  the  senatorial  party,  and  engaged  in  the  most  violent 
opposition  to  Pompey.  The  tribune  Flavius,  who  had  pro- 
posed Pompey's  measures,  went  so  far  as  to  seize  Celer,  and 
put  him  in  prison.  Celer  called  the  senators  to  his  cell  to 
deliberate  there.  The  tribune  set  up  his  tribunal  at  the 
prison  door,  so  that  the  senators  might  not  enter  ;  but  the 
senators  had  the  prison  walls  torn  down,  and  went  in  in 
spite  of  the  tribune. 

The  Senate,  not  content  with  estranging  Pompey  and 
Caesar  from  one  another,  and  openly  insulting  Pompey  be- 
sides, proceeded  to  offend  Caesar.  At  the  close  of  Caesar's 
praetorship, —  at  the  end  of  62  B.  c., —  the  province  of 
Further  Spain  had  been  assigned  him.  But  he  was  in  debt 
two  hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  sesterces  —  about  twelve 
millions  of  dollars.  To  pay  his  debts  and  make  the  neces- 


50  THE    TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

sary  preparations  for  his  journey  to  Spain,  lie  borrowed  from 
Crassus  eight  hundred  and  thirty  talents  —  nearly  thirteen 
millions  of  dollars.  The  senatorial  party,  however,  endeav- 
ored to  prevent  his  departure  from  Home,  and  a  decree  was 
passed  to  the  effect  that  the  praetors  should  not  go  to  their 
provinces  until  certain  important  questions  of  State  and 
religion  had  been  finally  settled.  Caesar  knew  that  this  was 
aimed  at  him,  and  therefore  in  defiance  of  the  decree  he 
went  at  once  to  his  province,  and  put  himself  at  the  head  of 
the  legions  there.  This  was  the  first  real  opportunity  that 
Caesar  had  ever  had  to  prove  his  ability  as  a  military  leader, 
and  he  acquitted  himself  well.  "He  thus  effected  the  com- 
plete subjugation  of  the  districts  of  Lusitania  north  of  the 
Tagus,  including  the  wild  fastnesses  of  the  Herminian  Mount- 
ains and  the  rapid  waters  of  the  Durius.  Brigantium  in  Gali- 
cia,  protected  on  the  land  side  by  the  difficult  character  of 
the  surrounding  country,  he  attacked  with  a  naval  armament, 
and  erected  his  victorious  standard  at  the  furthest  extremity 
of  his  province." — Merivale.1 

The  complete  conquest  of  his  province,  and  the  settle- 
ment of  its  civil  administration  upon  a  permanent  basis,  were 
all  accomplished  in  a  little  more  than  a  year.  His  great 
success  entitled  him  to  a  triumph,  and  he  desired  also  to 
stand  for  the  consulship  during  the  ensuing  year.  He  ad- 
dressed the  Senate  soliciting  the  award  of  the  triumph  which 
he  had  justly  earned.  The  Senate  knew  that  he  wanted 
also  to  be  a  candidate  for  the  consulship.  The  law  was 
that  no  general  to  whom  was  granted  a  triumph  should 
come  into  Rome  until  the  time  of  triumphal  entry,  which 
time  was  to  be  fixed  by  the  Senate  ;  and  the  custom,  which 
had  the  force  of  law,  was  that  every  candidate  for  the  consul- 
ship must  appear  publicly  in  the  Forum  on  three  distinct 
occasions,  and  must  be  present  personally  in  the  Forum  on 
the  day  of  the  election.  The  Senate  designed  to  prevent 
Caesar's  candidacy  for  the  consulship  by  granting  the  tri- 

1  "  History  of  the  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  iv,  par.  22. 


POMPEY,   CRASSUS,  AND   CAESAR.  51 

umph  and  setting  the  time  on  a  day  beyond  the  day  of 
the  election,  thus  keeping  him  out  of  the  city,  so  that  it 
would  be  impossible  for  him  to  be  present  in  the  Forum  as 
a  candidate.  This  custom  could  be,  and  in  fact  had  been, 
dispensed  with  on  important  occasions  ;  but  the  Senate  was 
very  tenacious  of  both  law  and  custom  when  they  could  be 
turned  to  its  own  advantage.  Caesar  applied  to  the  Senate 
for  a  dispensation  allowing  him  to  be  a  candidate  in  his 
absence.  The  Senate  would  not  grant  it,  and  when  Caesar's 
friends  began  to  urge  the  matter,  Cato  defeated  them  by 
obtaining  the  floor  and  talking  all  the  rest  of  the  day. 
When  Caesar  learned  of  the  determination  of  the  Senate  to 
shut  him  out  of  the  consulship  by  granting  a  triumph  on  a 
day  after  the  election,  he  checkmated  their  nicely-planned 
move.  He  renounced  the  triumph,  went  at  once  to  Rome, 
went  through  the  necessary  forms,  and  appeared  as  a  candi- 
date for  the  consulship. 

The  Senate  had  now  offended  Pompey  and  embittered 
his  soldiers,  and  had  committed  itself  to  open  and  deter- 
mined hostility  to  Caesar.  Pompey  took  in  the  situation, 
saw  his  opportunity,  and  acted  upon  it  at  once.  He  made 
overtures  to  Caesar,  who  received  him  willingly,  and  an  al- 
liance was  formed.  Caesar  and  Crassus  were  already  firm 
friends,  and  had  been  working  together  for  some  time. 
But  Crassus  and  Pompey  were  bitter  enemies.  Caesar's 
tact,  however,  soon  tempered  the  feud,  and  reconciled  the 
enmity.  Caesar  was  the  idol  of  the  people  ;  Pompey  was 
the  idol  of  the  soldiers ;  and  Crassus,  the  richest  individual 
in  the  Roman  world,  represented  the  moneyed  class,  the 
farmers  of  the  taxes,  etc.,  who  were  not  of  the  nobility. 
These  three  men  covenanted  together  ' '  that  no  proceedings 
should  be  allowed  to  take  place  in  the  commonwealth  with- 
out the  consent  of  each  of  the  three  contracting  parties. 
United  they  constituted  a  power  beyond  all  the  resources 
of  the  commonwealth  to  cope  with."  —  Merivale*  Thus 

2  Id.,  par.  33. 


52  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

THE    FIRST    TRIUMVIRATE 

became  an  accomplished  fact,  and  though  there  were  a  few 
expiring  struggles,  the  power  of  the  Roman  Senate  was  vir- 
tually gone  forever. 

Caesar  was  elected  consul  by  acclamation  ;  and  only  by 
the  very  desperation  of  bribery  and  corruption  did  the  sena- 
torial party  succeed  in  electing  Bibulus  as  his  colleague.  It 
was  the  custom,  immediately  upon  the  election  of  the  consuls, 
to  name  the  province  which  should  be  theirs  at  the  expiration 
of  the  year. of  their  office.  The  Senate  sought  to  cast  a 
slur  upon  Caesar  by  assigning  to  him  the  department  of  roads 
and  forests.  But  he  cared  not  for  that,  as  he  held  the  power 
of  the  State,  and  had  a  full  year  in  which  to  use  it  before 
anything  in  that  line  was  to  be  performed. 

Caesar's  consulship  was  for  the  year  59  B.  c.  The  first 
act  of  his  administration  was  to  secure  the  publication  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  Senate,  that  the  people  might  know  what 
was  done  therein.  He  next  brought  forward  the  land  law 
for  the  reward  of  Pompey's  veterans,  which  the  Senate  had 
already  refused  to  allow.  This  measure,  however,  like  that 
of  Tiberius  Gracchus,  included  thousands  of  the  free  citizens 
who  had  sold  their  lands  and  crowded  into  Rome.  In  the 
long  interval  since  the  repeal  of  the  land  law  of  Sulla,  things 
had  fallen  back  into  the  same  old  way.  The  public  lands 
had  fallen  from  those  to  whom  the  State  had  distributed  them, 
to  the  great  lauded  proprietors.  Caesar's  land  law,  like  all 
those  before  it,  proposed  to  buy  the  rights  of  these  proprie- 
tors, as  represented  in  their  improvements,  and  distribute 
the  lands  among  Pompey's  veterans  and  several  thousands 
of  the  unemployed  population  of  the  city.  He  showed  to 
the  Senate  that  there  was  plenty  of  money  in  the  treasury, 
which  Pompey's  soldiers  themselves  had  brought  to  the 
State,  to  supply  all  the  land  required  under  the  act.  The 
Senate  would  not  listen.  Cato  took  the  lead  in  the  opposi- 
tion, and  talked  again  for  a  whole  day  ;  he  grew  so  violent 


THE   CONSULATE  OF  C^SAR.  53 

at  last  that  Caesar  ordered  the  lictors  to  take  him  off  to 
prison.  Many  of  the  senators  followed  Cato.  As  nothing 
could  be  done,  however,  Caesar  ordered  Cato  to  be  set  free, 
at  the  same  time  telling  them  that  as  they  had  refused 
to  take  part  in  legislation,  henceforth  he  would  present  his 
propositions  at  once  to  the  people.  Bibulus,  however,  was 
owned  by  the  Senate,  and  he  as  consul  might  obstruct  and 
delay  the  proceeding  in  the  assembly.  Besides  this,  the 
Senate  had  bribed  three  tribunes  to  assist  Bibulus. 

Caesar  did  not  hesitate.  A  day  was  appointed,  and  he 
presented  his  bill  in  the  Forum,  which  before  daylight  the 
populace  had  filled  to  overflowing,  to  prevent  the  senatorial 
party  from  getting  in.  As  Bibulus  was  consul,  a  passage 
was  made  for  him  through  the  crowd,  and  he  took  his  place 
with  Caesar  on  the  porch  of  the  temple  of  Castor  and  Pollux. 
Caesar  stepped  forward,  and  read  from  a  tablet  the  proposed 
law,  and  turning  to  Bibulus  asked  if  he  had  any  fault  to  find 
with  it.  Bibulus  answered  that 'there  should  be  no  revolu- 
tions while  he  was  consul,  at  which  the  assembly  hissed. 
This  made  Bibulus  yet  more  angry,  and  he  burst  out  to  the 
whole  assembly,  "During  my  year  you  shall  not  obtain  your 
desire,  not  though  you  cried  for  it  with  one  voice. "  Pompey 
and  Crassus,  though  not  officials,  were  both  present.  Caesar 
now  signaled  to  them. ;  they  stepped  forward,  and  he 
asked  whether  they  would  support  the  law.  Pompey  made 
a  speech  in  which  he  declared  that  he  spoke  for  his  veterans 
and  for  the  poor  citizens,  and  that  he  approved  the  law  in 
every  letter  of  it.  Caesar  then  asked,  "Will  you  then  sup- 
port the  law  if  it  be  illegally  opposed  ?  "  Pompey  replied  : 
"Since  you,  consul,  and  you,  my  fellow-citizens,  ask  aid  of 
me,  a  poor  individual  without  office  and  without  authority, 
who  nevertheless  has  done  some  service  to  the  State,  I  say 
that  I  will  bear  the  shield  if  others  draw  the  sword." 

At  this,  a  mighty  shout  arose  from  the  assembly.  Crassus 
followed  with  a  speech  to  the  same  purpose.  He  likewise 
was  cheered  to  the  echo.  Bibulus  rushed  forward  to  forbid 


54:  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

the  vote  to  be  taken.  The  bribed  tribunes  interposed  their 
veto.  Bibulus  declared  that  he  had  consulted  the  auspices, 
—  had  read  the  sky, —  and  that  they  were  unfavorable  to 
any  further  proceeding  that  day,  and  declared  the  assembly 
dissolved.  But  the  assembly  had  not  come  together  to  be 
dissolved  by  him,  nor  in  any  such  way  as  that.  They  paid 
no  attention.  He  then  declared  all  the  rest  of  the  year  to 
be  holy  time.  This  was  met  by  a  yell  that  completely 
drowned  his  voice.  The  assembly  rushed  upon  the  platform, 
pushed  Bibulus  off,  broke  his  insignia  of  office,  bandied  him 
about  with  the  bribed  tribunes,  and  trampled  upon  them ; 
but  they  were  able  to  escape  without  serious  injury.  Then 
Cato  took  up  the  strain,  pushed  his  way  to  the  rostra,  and 
began  to  rail  at  Caesar.  He  was  met  with  a  roar  from  the 
assembly  that  completely  drowned  his  voice,  and  in  a  mo- 
ment he  was  arrested  and  dragged  away,  raving  and  gesticu- 
lating. The  law  was  then  passed  without  a  dissenting  voice. 
The  next  day  Bibulus  asked  the  Senate  to  pass  a  decree 
annulling  the  act  of  the  assembly,  but  this  failed.  Cato, 
Celer,  and  Favonius  openly  refused  to  obey  the  law,  upon 
which  a  second  law  was  passed,  making  it  a  capital  offense 
to  refuse  to  swear  obedience  to  the  law.  Bibulus  then  shut 
himself  up  in  his  own  house,  and  refused  to  act  as  consul 
any  more.  This  left  the  triumvirate  absolute,  with  the 
actual  power  in  Caesar's  hands  for  the  rest  of  the  year. 
Pompey's  soldiers  had  been  provided  for  by  the  land  law 
which  had  just  been  passed,  and  his  acts  in  Asia  were  con- 
firmed. In  addition  to  this  an  act  was  passed  in  behalf  of 
Crassus.  The  farmers  of  the  taxes  throughout  the  prov- 
inces had  taken  the  contract  at  too  high  a  price,  and  now 
they  were  not  making  as  much  as  they  expected.  Crassus 
was  the  chief  of  all  these,  and  an  act  was  passed  granting 
new  terms.  By  these  acts  Caesar  had  more  firmly  bound 
to  himself  both  Pompey  and  Crassus.  He  then  proceeded 
more  fully  to  gratify  the  people  by  a  magnificent  display  of 
plays  and  games. 


ROMAN   AUGURS. 


REFORM  BY  LAW.  55 

In  legislation,  the  Senate  was  totally  ignored  ;  Csesar 
acted  directly  with  the  assembly  of  the  people,  and  passed 
such  laws  as  he  pleased.  Yet  it  must  be  said  that  he  passed 
none  that  were  not  good  enough  in  themselves,  but  they 
were  laws  which  in  fact  meant  nothing.  There  was  no  pub- 
lic character  to  sustain  them,  and  consequently  they  were 
made  only  to  be  broken.  There  was  a  law  for  the  punish- 
ment of  adultery,  when  not  only  Caesar,  but  nine  tenths  of 
the  people  were  ready  to  commit  adultery,  at  the  first  op- 
portunity. There  were  laws  for  the  protection  of  citizens 
against  violence,  when  every  citizen  was  ready  to  commit 
violence  at  a  moment's  notice.  There  were  laws  to  punish 
judges  who  allowed  themselves  to  be  bribed,  when  almost 
every  man  in  Rome  was  ready  both  to  offer  and  to  receive 
bribes.  There  were  laws  against  defrauding  the  revenue, 
when  almost  every  person  only  desired  an  opportunity  to  do 
that  very  thing.  There  were  laws  against  bribery  at  elec- 
tions, when  every  soul  in  Rome  from  Caesar  to  the  lowest 
one  of  the  rabble  that  shouted  in  the  Forum,  was  ready  to 
bribe  or  to  be  bribed.  "  Morality  and  family  life  were  treated 
as  antiquated  things  among  all  ranks  of  society.  To  be  poor 
was  not  merely  the  sorest  disgrace  and  the  worst  crime,  but 
the  only  disgrace  and  the  only  crime  :  for  money  the  states- 
man sold  the  State,  and  the  burgess  sold  his  freedom  ;  the 
post  of  the  officer  and  the  vote  of  the  juryman  were  to  be 
had  for  money  ;  for  money  the  lady  of  quality  surrendered 
her  person,  as  well  as  the  common  courtesan  ;  falsifying  of 
documents,  and  perjuries  had  become  so  common  that  in  a 
popular  poet  of  this  age  an  oath  is  called  '  the  plaster  for 
debts.'  Men  had  forgotten  what  honesty  was  ;  a  person 
who  refused  a  bribe  was  regarded  not  as  an  upright  man, 
but  as  a  personal  foe.  The  criminal  statistics  of  all  times 
and  countries  will  hardly  furnish  a  parallel  to  the  dread- 
ful picture  of  crimes — so  varied,  so  horrible,  and  so  un- 
natural."—  Mommsen.3  In  this  condition  of  affairs  such 
laws  were  nothing  more  nor  less  than  a  legal  farce. 

3  "  History  of  Rome,"  book  v,  chap,  xi,  par.  72. 


56  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

Caesar's  consulship  was  about  to  expire,  and  as  above 
stated,  when  he  was  elected  the  Senate  had  named  as  his 
"province"  the  department  of  roads  and  forests  instead  of  a 
province.  As  this  was  intended  at  the  first  to  be  only  a  slur 
upon  Csesar,  and  as  both  he  and  the  people  fully  understood 
it,  the  people  set  aside  this  appointment,  and  voted  to  Csesar 
for  five  years  the  command  of  Illyria,  and  Gaul  within  the 
Alps  ;  but  as  there  were  some  fears  from  the  barbarians  of 
Gaul  beyond  the  Alps,  a  proposition  was  introduced  to 
extend  his  province  to  include  that.  Pompey  and  Crassus 
heartily  assented,  and  the  Senate  seeing  that  it  would  be 
voted  to  him  any  way  by  the  assembly,  made  a  virtue  of 
necessity,  and  bestowed  this  itself.  Pompey  now  married 
Caesar's  daughter  Julia,  which  more  firmly  cemented  the 
alliance  while  Csesar  should  be  absent. 

The  triumvirate  had  been  formed  to  continue  for  five 
years.  As  the  term  drew  to  a  close,  the  triumvirate  was 
renewed  for  five  years  more.  Pompey  and  Crassus  were 
made  consuls  for  the  year  55  B.  c.,  with  the  understanding 
that  while  in  office  they  should  extend  Caesar's  command  in 
Gaul  for  five  years  longer  after  the  expiration  of  the  first 
five  ;  and  that  at  the  expiration  of  their  consulate,  Pompey 
should  have  Spain  as  his  province,  and  Crassus  should  have 
Syria. 

The  first  thing  to  be  done  by  the  new  consuls  was  to  se- 
cure the  assembly's  indorsement  of  the  triumvirs'  arrange- 
ment of  the  provinces.  This  also  the  senators  opposed  by 
every  means  to  the  very  last.  Cato  raved  as  usual,  and 
when  at  the  expiration  of  his  allotted  time  he  refused  to  sit 
down,  he  was  dragged  away  by  an  officer,  and  the  meeting 
adjourned.  The  next  day  the  assembly  came  together  again. 
When  the  senatorial  party  saw  that  the  action  of  the  trium- 
virs was  to  be  ratified  in  spite  of  them,  Cato  and  Atticus,  a 
tribune,  were  lifted  to  men's  shoulders,  and  the  tribune  cried 
out,  as  Bibulus  on  the  like  occasion  formerly,  that  the  skies 
were  unfavorable,  and  the  proceedings  illegal.  Other  trib- 


K 
W 
EH 


THE   TRIUMVIRATE  DISSOLVED.  57 

unes  ordered  the  proceedings  to  go  on,  at  which  a  riot 
began.  Clubs  and  stones  and  swords  and  knives  were  freely 
used.  The  senatorial  party  were  driven  out,  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  provinces  fully  ratified,  and  the  assembly  dis- 
missed. The  people  had  no  sooner  gone  out  than  the 
senatorial  party  came  back,  presented  a  motion  for  Caesar's 
recall,  and  proceeded  to  vote  upon  it.  The  assembly  re- 
turned, and  drove  them  out  with  more  bloodshed,  and  cer- 
tainly to  prevent  all  question  as  to  what  had  been  done, 
passed  a  second  time  the  motion  upon  Caesar's  appointment. 

Pompey,  yet  more  to  please  the  populace,  dedicated  a 
new  theater,  which  would  seat  forty  thousand  people.  It 
was  decorated  with  marble  and  adorned  with  precious  stones 
in  such  abundance  as  had  never  before  been  seen  in  Rome. 
The  dedication  with  music,  games,  chariot  races,  and  contests 
between  men  and  beasts,  continued  five  days,  during  which 
five  hundred  lions — one  hundred  each  day  —  were  turned 
loose  in  the  arena  only  to  be  killed.  Besides  this,  eighteen 
elephants  were  compelled  to  fight  with  bands  of  gladiators, 
the  piteous  cries  of  the  poor  creatures  finding  a  response  even 
in  the  savage  sympathies  of  Romans. 

By  the  strifes  of  parties,  the  election  of  consuls  for  the 
year  54  was  prevented  until  the  expiration  of  55,  and  the 
consulates  of  Pompey  and  Crassus  had  expired.  Crassus 
departed  for  the  East.  Pompey  assumed  command  of  the 
province  of  Spain,  but  instead  of  going  to  Spain,  remained 
in  Rome. 

In  54,  Pompey's  wife,  Caesar's  daughter,  died  ;  in  June 
53  Crassus  was  killed  in  that  memorable  battle  with  the 
Parthians  ;  and  the  triumvirate  was  dissolved.  Pompey 
had  now  been  so  long  separated  from  the  army  that  his  in- 
fluence with  the  soldiery  was  almost  gone,  while  Caesar's 
uninterrupted  course  of  victory  in  Gaul  had  made  him  the 
idol  of  the  army,  as  well  as  the  pride  of  the  people.  The 
triumvirate  was  no  sooner  broken  by  the  death  of  Crassus, 
than  the  Senate  began  earnestly  to  try  to  win  Pompey,  and 


58  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

compass  Caesar's  destruction.  "No  aristocracy  was  ever 
more  short-sighted  at  the  crisis  of  its  fate  than  the  once  glo- 
rious patriciate  of  Rome.  It  clung  desperately  to  its  privi- 
leges, not  from  a  fond  regard  to  their  antiquity,  or  their 
connection  with  any  social  or  religious  prejudices;  disdained 
to  invoke  the  watchwords  of  patriotism  or  utility  ;  it  took  up 
its  ground  upon  the  enactments  which  Sulla  had  made  to  en- 
hance its  own  wealth  and  power,  and  depress  those  of  its 
rivals,  and  contended  with  its  assailants  upon  purely  selfish 
considerations.  Without  a  policy  and  without  a  leader,  the 
nobles  went  staggering  onward  in  their  blind  conflict  with 
the  forces  arrayed  against  them.'"  - Merivale.* 

Pompey  took -his  stand  with  the  Senate.  Although  he 
was  in  Rome,  he  was  really  commander  of  the  province  of 
Spain,  and  was  thus  in  possession  of  an  army,  though  that 
army  was  at  a  distance.  Under  pretense  of  a  need  of  troops 
in  Syria  against  the  Parthians  who  had  defeated  and  slain 
Crassus,  the  Senate  drew  frojn  Caesar  two  legions,  and  sta- 
tioned them  at  Capua.  A  motion  was  then  made  in  the 
Senate  for  Caesar's  recall,  and  the  appointment  of  his  suc- 
cessor. But  just  then  an  obstacle  presented  itself  which 
disconcerted  all  their  plans.  Scribonius  Curio  had  been  one 
of  the  most  violent  partisans  of  the  senatorial  party,  and 
largely  on  account  of  this  he  had  been  elected  tribune  by  the 
favor  of  the  Senate.  But  Curio  went  over  to  the  interests 
of  Caesar.  When  the  motion  was  made  to  appoint  a  suc- 
cessor to  Caesar,  Curio  moved  an  amendment  to  the  effect 
that  Pompey  be  included,  and  that  when  Caesar  was  relieved 
of  his  command,  Pompey  should  be  relieved  of  his  command 
also.  This  amendment  met  with  such  approval  that  it  was 
accepted  by  an  overwhelming  majority,  and  the  people  were 
so  jubilant  that  they  strewed  flowers  in  Curio's  way  as  he  re- 
turned from  the  assembly.  The  adoption  of  this  amendment 
completely  blocked  the  effort  of  the  Senate  to  depose  Caesar. 

Curio  so  persistently  interposed  his  veto  to  all  proceedings 
against  Caesar,  that  at  last  an  attempt  was  made  to  get  rid 

*"  Romans  Uuder  the  Empire,"  chap,  xi,  par.  4  from  end. 


LEGAL    GOVERNMENT  AT  AN  END.  59 

of  him.  One  of  the  censors  pronounced  him  unworthy  of  a 
place  in  the  Senate  ;  the  consul  Marcellus  put  the  question 
to  vote,  and  it  was  defeated.  Then  the  consul  and  his 
partisans  dressed  themselves  in  mourning,  and  went  straight 
to  Pompey  ;  declared  the  city  in  danger  ;  placed  its  safety 
in  his  hands  ;  and  gave  him  the  two  legions  that  were  at 
Capua.  Pompey  refused  to  accept  the  charge  unless  it  was 
sanctioned  by  the  consuls  who  had  been  elected  for  the  next 
year.  These  both  confirmed  the  appointment,  and  prom- 
ised their  support  when  they  should  come  into  office. 
Caesar's  enemies  had  now  both  an  army  and  a  commander. 
TJds  being  by  the  official  act  of  the  consular  authority,  WAS  A 

CONFESSION  THAT  LEGAL  GOVERNMENT  WAS  AT  AN  END,  AND 
WAS  VIRTUALLY  THE  ESTABLISHMENT  OF  GOVERNMENT  ONLY  BY 
MILITARY  FORCE. 

Curio's  tribunate  ended  with  the  year  50,  and  he  closed 
his  term  of  office  with  an  appeal  to  the  people,  in  which  he 
declared  that  justice  was  violated,  that  the  reign  of  law  was 
passed,  and  that  a  military  domination  reigned  in  the  city. 
He  then  left  the  city,  and  went  to  Caesar,  who  was  encamped 
at  Ravenna  with  a  legion. 

The  consuls  for  the  year  49  were  both  avowed  enemies 
to  Caesar.  Two  of  the  tribunes  for  the  year  were  Mark 
Antony  and  Cassius  Longinus, —  friendly  to  Caesar  and 
ready  to  veto  every  proposition  that  appeared  to  be  to  his 
disadvantage.  Caesar  sent  Curio  back  to  Rome  early  in 
January  with  a  letter  in  which  he  offered  any  one  of  three 
things  :  (1)  That  the  agreement  long  before  made  should 
stand,  and  he  be  elected  consul  in  his  absence  ;  or  (2)  that 
he  would  leave  his  army  if  Pompey  would  disband  his 
troops  ;  or  (3)  that  he  would  surrender  to  a  successor  all 
Gaul  beyond  the  Alps  with  eight  of  his  ten  legions,  if  he 
were  allowed  to  retain  his  original  province  of  Illyria  and 
Northern  Italy  with  two  legions.  The  consuls  objected  to 
the  reading  of  the  letter,  but  the  demands  of  the  tribunes 
prevailed.  When  it  had  been  read  through,  the  consuls  pro- 


60  THE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

hibited  any  debate  upon  it,  and  made  a  motion  to  consider 
the  state  of  the  republic.  None  of  Caesar's  propositions 
would  be  considered  for  a  moment.  Lentulus,  one  of  the 
consuls,  took  the  lead  in  urging  prompt  and  determined 
action,  and  others  followed  to  the  same  purpose.  Some 
advised  delay  till  they  were  better  prepared  ;  others  advised 
that  a  deputation  be  sent  to  treat  further  with  Caesar. 

The  majority  supported  Lentulus.  It  was  moved  that 
Caesar  should  dismiss  his  troops  by  a  certain  day  which  the 
Senate  should  name,  and  return  to  Rome  as  a  private  citizen, 
or  be  declared  a  public  enemy.  The  two  tribunes  interposed 
their  vetos  on  the  ground  that  it  had  been  decreed  by  the 
people  that  Csesar  should  be  allowed  to  stand  for  the  consul- 
ship in  his  absence  ;  but  their  plea  was  totally  disregarded, 
and  the  motion  was  passed  almost  unanimously.  The  trib- 
unes then  protested  against  the  illegality  of  the  proceedings, 
and  cried  aloud  that  they  were  refused  the  free  exercise  of 
their  official  prerogatives.  The  assembly  in  reply  voted  the 
State  in  danger  ;  suspended  the  laws  ;  ordered  an  immediate 
levy  of  troops  ;  and  gave  the  consuls  sole  power  to  provide 
for  the  public  safety.  The  Senate  next  proposed  to  punish 
the  two  tribunes.  They  were  given  to  understand  that  if 
they  entered  the  Senate  house,  they  would  be  expelled  by 
force.  They,  with  Curio,  fled  to  Caesar.  The  consuls  made 
Pompey  commander-in-chief  of  the  forces,  and  gave  him  the 
freedom  of  the  public  treasury.  Pompey  went  to  Capua  to 
take  charge  of  the  two  legions  there,  and  organize  the  new 
levies. 

When  the  news  of  these  proceedings  reached  Caesar  at 
Ravenna,  he  assembled  his  legions,  and  laid  the  whole 
matter  before  them.  The  Senate  had  satisfied  itself  with 
the  pleasing  illusion  that  Caesar's  legions  were  so  dissatisfied 
with  him  and  discouraged  by  the  long  tedious  campaigns  in 
barbarous  Gaul,  that  they  only  waited  for  a  good  opportu- 
nity to  desert  him  in  a  body.  But  never  had  they  been 
more  mistaken  than  they  were  in  this.  The  soldiers  were 


CAESAR   CROSSES   THE  RUBICON.  61 

ready  to  support  him  to  the  utmost.  They  not  only  offered 
to  serve  without  pay,  but  actually  offered  him  money  for  the 
expenses  of  the  war.  Only  one  officer  out  of  the  whole 
army  failed  him.  This  one  slipped  away  secretly,  and  fled 
to  Pompey,  and  Caesar  sent  all  his  baggage  after  him. 

Caesar  sent  orders  to  Gaul  beyond  the  Alps  for  two 
legions  to  follow  him,  and  he  set  out  toward  Rome  with  the 
one  legion  —  5, 000  men  —  that  was  with  him.  About  twenty 
miles  from  Ravenna,  a  little  stream  called  the  Rubicon 
formed  part  of  the  boundary  between  the  territory  of  Rome 
proper  and  the  provinces  which  had  been  assigned  to  Caesar. 
To  cross  this  boundary  with  an  armed  force  was  to  declare 
war ;  but  as  the  Senate  had  already  by  its  actions  more  than 
once  openly  declared  war,  Caesar  had  no  hesitation  in  cross- 
ing the  boundary.  He  passed  it,  and  marched  ten  miles 
onward  to  Rimini.  There  he  halted  and  waited  for  the 
two  legions  ordered  from  Gaul,  one  of  which  reached  him 
about  the  end  of  January,  and  the  other  about  the  middle  of 
February. 

By  the  time  that  Caesar  had  reached  Rimini,  the  rumor 
had  reached  Rome  that  he  was  coming,  and  a  panic  seized 
his  enemies  throughout  the  whole  city.  Their  excited  im- 
aginations and  guilty  fears  pictured  him  as  coming  with  all 
his  legions,  accompanied  by  hosts  of  the  terrible  barbarians 
of  Gaul,  hurrying  on  by  forced  marches,  nearer  and  yet 
nearer,  and  breathing  forth  fiery  wrath.  ' '  Flight,  instant 
flight,  was  the  only  safety.  Up  they  rose,  consuls,  praetors, 
senators,  leaving  wives  and  children  and  property  to  their 
fate,  not  halting  even  to  take  the  money  out  of  the  treasury, 
but  contenting  themselves  with  leaving  it  locked.  On  foot, 
on  horseback,  in  litters,  in  carriages,  they  fled  for  their  lives 
to  find  safety  under  Pornpey's  wing  in  Capua." — Froude* 

Instead  of  Caesar's  marching  toward  Rome,  however,  he 
was  waiting  quietly  at  Rimini  for  his  legions  to  come  from 
Gaul,  and  his  waiting  there  was  working  doubly  to  his  ad- 
vantage, to  say  nothing  of  the  results  of  the  panic-stricken 

6  "  Caesar,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  3. 


62  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

fears  of  his  enemies  in  Rome.  Not  only  did  the  two  legions 
come  promptly  from  Gaul,  but  troops  flocked  to  him  from 
all  the  country  around  ;  and  cities  on  the  way  to  Rome 
began  to  declare  for  him,  and  were  ready  to  open  their 
gates  as  soon  as  he  should  arrive.  Ahenobarbus,  with  a 
few  thousand  men,  occupied  a  strong  place  in  the  mountains 
directly  in  Caesar's  way.  Caesar  surrounded  the  place,  and 
captured  the  whole  body  of  them.  lie  then  let  them  all  go. 
Ahenobarbus  and  some  of  his  officers  went  away,  but  his 
troops  declared  for  Caesar.  As  soon  as  Pompey  and  the 
nobles  heard  of  the  capture  of  Ahenobarbus  and  the  deser- 
tion of  these  troops,  they  took  up  their  flight  again  for 
Brundusium  on  the  east  coast  of  Italy,  where  they  might 
take  ships  for  Epirus.  The  greater  part  of  them  sailed 
away  at  once.  Pompey  remained  with  a  portion  of  his 
army  for  the  ships  to  return  to  take  the  in  away.  Caesar 
hurried  to  Brundusium,  where  he  arrived  on  the  ninth  of 
March.  Pompey  was  there.  Caesar  asked  for  a  meeting, 
but  Pompey  refused.  Caesar  began  a  siege,  but  the  ships 
soon  came,  and  Pompey  and  his  army  sailed  away  for 
Durazzo  on  the  coast  of  Epirus.  Caesar  had  no  ships,  and 
could  follow  the  fugitives  no  farther.  He  therefore  went 
directly  to  Rome.  She  threw  wide  her  gates  to  receive  him. 
The  remains  of  the  Senate  was  convened  by  the  tribunes 
who  had  fled  to  Caesar,  but  it  would  do  nothing.  The  as- 
sembly of  the  people  voted  him  the  money  in  the  treasury. 
He  took  what  he  needed,  and  as  Spain  and  the  Mediterranean 
Coast  of  Gaul  were  yet  subject  to  Pompey,  he  went  in  a  few 
days  to  bring  these  into  subjection.  This  was  all  accom- 
plished before  winter.  He  was  made  dictator  in  his  ab- 
sence. He  returned  to  Rome  in  October.  He  appointed  a 
day  for  the  election  of  consuls  for  the  year  48,  and  himself 
and  Servilius  Isauricus  were  chosen  without  opposition. 
Thus  he  was  elected  consul  for  the  very  year  that  had  been 
promised  him  long  before  by  the  Senate  and  assembly,  al- 
though the  Senate  had  declared  that  he  never  should  have 


JULIUS   CAESAR. 


DICTATOR,  DEMI-GOD,  AND  DEITY.          63 

it  at  all.  The  election  of  the  other  lawful  magistrates  soon 
followed,  the  form  of  legal  government  was  restored,  and 
he  set  out  at  once  to  find  Pompey  and  the  Senate.  Pie 
marched  to  Brundusium,  and  sailed  to  Epirus.  There  he 
found  that  Pompey  had  gone  to  Macedonia.  After  much 
maneuvering,  the  armies  met  at  Pharsalia  in  Thessaly,  and 
Pompey 's  army  was  completely  routed.  Pompey  fled  to 
Egypt.  Caesar  followed  closely ;  but  Pompey  had  been 
murdered  and  beheaded  before  he  had  fairly  landed,  arid 
only  his  head  was  preserved  and  rendered  an  unwelcome 
present  to  Caesar. 

Caesar  spent  the  time  till  the  autumn  of  47  setting  things 
in  order  in  Egypt  and  the  East,  then  he  returned  to  Rome. 
Finding  that  Pompey  was  dead,  and  that  all  hope  of  sup- 
port from  him  was  gone,  Caesar's  enemies  in  Rome  became 
his  most  servile  flatterers.  Those  who  had  plunged  the 
State  into  civil  war  rather  than  allow  him  while  absent  to 
be  even  a  candidate  for  the  consulship,  now  in  his  absence 
made  him  dictator  for  a  whole  year,  and  were  ready  to  heap 
upon  him  other  preferences  without  limit. 

A  part  of  the  year  46  was  spent  in  subduing  the  oppos- 
ing forces  in  Africa.  This  was  soon  accomplished,  and  the 
servile  flatterers  went  on  with  their  fawning  adulations. 
Even  before  his  return,  the  Senate  voted  in  his  favor  a 
national  thanksgiving  to  continue  forty  days.  When  he 
returned,  they  voted  him  not  one  triumph,  but  four,  with 
intervals  of  several  days  between,  and  that  his  triumphal 
car  should  be  drawn  by  white  horses.  They  made  him  in- 
spector of  public  morals  for  three  years.  And  as  though 
they  would  be  as  extravagant  in  their  adulation  as  they  had 
been  in  their  condemnation,  they  voted  him  dictator  for  ten 
years,  with  the  right  to  nominate  the  consuls  and  praetors 
each  year  ;  that  in  the  Senate  his  chair  should  always  be 
between  those  of  the  two  consuls  ;  that  he  should  preside 
in  all  the  games  of  the  circus  ;  that  his  image  carved  in 
ivory  should  be  borne  in  processions  among  the  images  of 


64  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

the  gods,  and  be  kept  laid  up  in  the  capitol  over  against  the 
place  of  Jupiter ;  that  his  name  should  be  engraved  on  a 
tablet  as  the  restorer  of  the  capital  ;  and  finally  that  a  bronze 
statue  of  him  standing  on  a  globe  should  be  set  up  with  the 
inscription,  "  Csesar,  the  Demi-god." 

Csesar  was  not  wanting  in  efforts  to  maintain  the  ap- 
plause of  the  populace.  He  gave  to  each  soldier  about  a 
thousand  dollars,  and  to  each  citizen  about  twenty  dollars, 
with  house-rent  free  for  a  year  ;  and'  provided  a  magnificent 
feast  for  the  citizens,  who  were  supported  by  the  public 
grants  of  grain.  Twenty-two  thousand  tables  were  spread 
with  the  richest  viands,  upon  which  the  two  hundred  thou- 
sand State  paupers  feasted,  while  from  hogsheads  the  finest 
wine  flowed  freely.  Above  all  this  he  furnished  the  finest 
display  of  games  and  bloody  battles  of  gladiators  that  had 
ever  been  seen.  So  great  was  it,  indeed,  and  so  bloody, 
and  so  long  continued,  that  it  fairly  surfeited  the  savage 
Roman  appetite  ;  and  the  people  began  to  complain  that  the 
vast  sums  of  money  spent  on  the  shows  would  have  been 
better  employed  in  donations  direct  to  themselves.  Time 
and  space  would  fail  to  tell  of  the  numbers,  the  magnitude, 
and  the  magnificence  of  the  buildings  with  which  he  adorned 
the  city. 

In  the  winter  of  46—5  Csesar  was  compelled  to  go  to 
Spain  to  reduce  the  last  remains  of  the  senatorial  forces. 
This  was  accomplished  before  the  month  of  April  was  passed, 
yet  he  did  not  return  to  Rome  until  September.  As  soon 
as  the  news  of  his  victory  reached  Rome,  however,  the  Sen- 
ate, which  sincerely  hoped  he  would  be  killed,  began  once 
more  to  pour  forth  its  fulsome  flattery.  It  voted  a  national 
thanksgiving  to  continue  fifty  days,  decreed  him  another 
triumph,  conferred  upon  him  the  power  to  extend  the 
bounds  of  the  city,  and  erected  another  statue  of  him  with 
the  inscription,  "To  The  Invincible  Deity." 

When  he  returned  and  had  enjoyed  his  triumph,  he  again 
celebrated  the  occasion  with  games,  combats,  and  shows  no 


CESAR'S  GOVERNMENT.  fi5 

less  splendid  than  those  which  he  had  given  before,  only  not 
so  long  continued.  After  this  was  all  over,  he  took  up  the 
regulation  of  the  affairs  of  society  and  state.  He  gave  his 
soldiers  lands,  but  instead  of  trying  to  provide  lands  in  Italy 
for  all  of  them,  he  distributed  the  most  of  them  in  colonies 
in  the  provinces.  He  cut  down  the  quantity  of  public  grants 
of  grain,  and  sent  thousands  upon  thousands  of  citizens  away 
beyond  the  seas  to  establish  Roman  provinces.  Eighty 
thousand  were  sent  to  rebuild  Carthage.  Another  host  was 
sent  to  rebuild  Corinth,  which  had  been  destroyed  by  the 
Romans  a  hundred  years  before.  To  lessen  the  evils  that 
had  rent  the  State  so  long  in  the  annual  elections,  he  enacted 
that  the  elections  to  the  lesser  offices  of  the  State  should  be 
held  only  once  in  three  years.  He  enacted  that  at  least  one 
third  of  the  hired  help  of  farmers,  vineyardists,  stock  raisers, 
etc.,  should  be  Roman  citizens.  He  enacted  that  all  physi- 
cians, philosophers,  and  men  of  science  should  be  Roman 
citizens.  This  privilege  was  likewise  bestowed  upon  large 
numbers  of  people  in  Gaul,  Spain,  and  other  places.  In  the 
early  days  of  Rome,  unions  of  the  different  trades  and  handi- 
crafts had  been  formed  for  mutual  benefit.  In  the  times 
which  we  have  sketched,  they  had  become  nothing  but  polit- 
ical clubs,  and  withal  had  become  so  dangerous  that  they 
had  to  be  utterly  abolished.  In  B.  c.  58,  Clodius,  to 
strengthen  his  political  influence,  had  restored  them.  Caesar 
now  abolished  them  again,  but  allowed  bona  Jide  trades- 
unions  to  be  organized  upon  the  original  plan  of  mutual 
benefit.8 

As  inspector  of  public  morals  he  next  attempted,  as  he 
had  when  he  was  consul  in  59,  to  create  reform  by  law.  It 
was  a  time  of  unbounded  luxury  and  of  corresponding  license 
and  licentiousness.  He  forbade  the  rich  young  nobles  to  be 
carried  in  litters.  Sea  and  land  were  being  traversed  for 
dainties  for  the  tables  of  the  rich;  Caesar  appointed  in- 

6Plutarch's  "Lives,"  Numa,  chap.    xxxi.     Merivale,  "Romans   Under   the 
Empire,"  chap,  iv,  par.  42  ;  and  chap,  xx,  par.  11. 
6 


66  TEE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

specters  of  the  tables  and  the  provision  stores  to  regulate 
the  fare,  and  any  prohibited  dish  found  on  any  table  was 
picked  up  and  carried  away  even  though  the  guests  were 
sitting  at  the  table  at  the  moment.  The  marriage  relation 
had  fallen  to  very  loose  ways.  He  enacted  that  any  Roman 
citizen  who  was  the  father  of  three  legitimate  children  born 
in  Rome,  or  four  in  Italy,  or  five  anywhere  else,  should  be  ex- 
empted from  certain  public  obligations ;  and  that  the  mothers 
in  such  cases  should  be  allowed  the  special  dignity  of  riding 
in  litters,  dressing  in  purple,  and  wearing  necklaces  of  pearls. 
Divorces  were  as  frequent  as  anybody  chose  to  make  them, 
and  Csesar,  who  had  divorced  his  own  wife  merely  upon 
suspicion,  essayed  to  regulate  divorces  ;  and  he  who  from 
his  youth  had  enjoyed  the  personal  favors  of  the  chief  women 
of  Rome,  he  who  ' '  had  mistresses  in  every  country  which  he 
visited,  and  liaisons  with  half  the  ladies  in  Rome,"  and  who 
was  at  the  time  maintaining  an  adulterous  connection  with 
the  Queen  of  Egypt, —  he  presumed  to  enact  laws  against 
adultery. 

One  thing,  however,  he  did,  which  was  more  lasting  than 
all  his  other  acts  put  together  ;  and,  in  fact,  of  more  real 
benefit.  This  was  the  reform  of  the  calendar. 

All  this  time  the  Senate  was  heaping  upon  him  titles  and 
honors  in  the  same  extravagant  profusion  as  before.  One 
decree  made  him  the  father  of  his  country  ;  another  liber- 
ator ;  another  made  him  imperator,  and  commander-in-chief 
of  the  army  for  life  with  the  title  to  be  hereditary  in  his 
family.  They  gave  him  full  charge  of  the  treasury  ;  they 
made  him  consul  for  ten  years,  and  dictator  for  life.  A 
triumphal  robe  and  a  crown  of  laurel  were  bestowed  on  him, 
with  authority  to  wear  them  upon  all  occasions.  A  figure  of 
his  head  was  impressed  upon  the  coin.  His  birthday  was 
declared  to  be  a  holiday  forever ;  and  the  name  of  the  month, 
Quinctilius^  was  changed  to  Julius,  and  is  still  our  July. 
Next  his  person  was  declared  sacred,  and  any  disrespect  to 
him  in  word  or  action  was  made  to  be  sacrilege.  It  was 


THE  MTJRDm   OF  CAESAR.  $7 

decreed  that  the  oath  of  allegiance  should  be  sworn  by  the 
Fortune  of  Caesar.  The  Senate  itself  took  this  oath,  and  by 
it  swore  sacredly  to  maintain  his  acts,  and  watch  over  the 
safety  of  his  person.  To  complete  the  scale,  they  declared 
that  he  was  no  more  Caius  Julius,  a  man,  but  Divus  Julius, 
a  god  ;  and  that  a  temple  should  be  built  for  the  worship 
of  him,  and  Antony  should  be  the  first  priest. 

Then,  having  exhausted  the  extremest  measure  of  the 
most  contemptible  sycophancy,  March  15,  B.  c.  44,  THEY 

MURDERED    HIM. 

Csesar  was  dead  ;  but  all  that  had  made  him  what  he  had 
been,  still  lived.  Pretended  patriots  assassinated  Caesar  to 
save  the  republic  from  what  they  supposed  was  threatened  in 
him  ;  but  in  that  act  of  base  ingratitude  and  cruel  ' '  patriot- 
ism," there  was  accomplished  that  which  they  professed  to 
fear  from  him,  and  which  in  fact  they  realized  from  those 
who  were  worse  than  he.  It  was  with  the  Romans  at  this 
time,  as  it  was  with  the  Athenians  when  Demosthenes  told 
them  that  if  there  were  no  Philip,  they  themselves  would 
create  a  Philip.  Affairs  had  reached  that  point  in  the 
Roman  State  where  a  Caesar  was  inevitable,  and  though  to 
avoid  it  they  had  killed  the  greatest  Roman  that  ever  lived, 
the  reality  was  only  the  more  hastened  by  the  very  means 
which  they  had  employed  to  prevent  it.  This  they  themselves 
realized  as  soon  as  they  had  awakened  from  the  dream  in 
which  they  had  done  the  desperate  deed.  Cicero  exactly 
defined  the  situation,  and  gave  a  perfect  outline  of  the  whole 
history  of  the  times,  when,  shortly  after  the  murder  of  Caesar, 
he  bitterly  exclaimed,  "We  have  killed  the  king;  but  the 
kingdom  is  with  us  still.  We  have  taken  away  the  tyrant ; 
the  tyranny  survives."  That  tyranny  survived  in  the  breast 
of  every  man  in  Rome. 

At  the  death  of  Caesar,  to  Mark  Antony,  the  sole  sur- 
viving consul,  the  reins  of  government  fell.  Lepidus, 
Caesar's  general  of  cavalry,  was  outside  the  walls  with  a 


68  THE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

legion  of  troops  about  to  depart  for  Spain.  He  took  pos- 
session of  the  Camp  of  Mars,  and  sent  to  Antony  assur- 
ances of  support.  As  night  came  on,  with  a  body  of  troops 
he  entered  the  city  and  camped  in  the  Forum.  He  and 
Antony  at  once  came  to  a  mutual  understanding.  Antony 
as  consul  agreed  to  secure  for  Lepidus  the  office  of  Pontifex 
Maximus  made  vacant  by  the  murder  of  Caesar,  and  the  al- 
liance was  completed  by  Antony's  daughter  being  given  in 
marriage  to  the  son  of  Lepidus.  Antony  secured  Caesar's 
will  and  all  his  private  papers,  besides  a  great  sum  of  money. 

As  the  will  showed  that  Caesar  had  bequeathed  his  pri- 
vate gardens  to  the  people  of  Rome  forever  as  a  pleasure 
ground,  and  to  each  citizen  a  sum  of  money  amounting  to 
nearly  fourteen  dollars,  this  bound  the  populace  more  firmly 
than  ever  to  the  memory  of  Caesar.  And  as  Antony  stood 
forth  as  the  one  to  avenge  Caesar's  death,  this  brought  the 
populace  unanimously  to  his  support.  By  the  help  of  all 
this  power  and  influence,  Antony  determined  to  put  himself 
in  the  place  which  Caesar  had  occupied.  Among  Caesar's 
papers  he  found  recorded  many  of  Caesar's  plans  and  inten- 
tions in  matters  of  the  government.  These  he  made  to 
serve  his  purpose  as  occasion  demanded  ;  for  the  Senate 
dared  not  dissent  from  any  of  Caesar's  recorded  wishes  and 
designs.  When  the  legitimate  papers  were  exhausted,  he 
bribed  one  of  Caesar's  clerks  to  forge  and  declare  to  be 
Caesar's  purpose,  such  State  documents  as  he  chose  to  have 
made  laws,  all  of  which  by  the  power  of  Caesar's  name  were 
carried  against  all  opposition. 

Soon,  however,  there  came  a  serious  check  upon  the  suc- 
cess of  Antony's  soaring  ambition.  Octavius  appeared  upon 
the  scene.  Caius  Octavius  was  the  grandson  of  one  of 
Caesar's  sisters,  and  by  Caesar's  will  was  left  his  heir  and 
adopted  son.  He  was  then  in  the  nineteenth  year  of  his 
age.  He  was  in  Apollonia  when  Caesar  was  killed  ;  and 
upon  learning  of  the  murder  he  immediately  set  out  for 
Rome,  not  knowing  the  particulars,  nor  yet  that  Caesar  had 


OCTAVIUS  PRESENTS  HIMSELF.  69 

left  a  will  in  his  favor.  These  lie  learned  when  he  reached 
the  coast  of  Italy.  Without  delay,  he  incorporated  Caesar's 
name  with  his  own, —  Caius  Julius  Caesar  Octavius, —  and 
presented  himself  to  the  nearest  body  of  troops  as  the  heir 
of  the  great  general.  When  he  reached  Home,  Antony  re- 
ceived him  coldly  ;  refused  to  give  him  any  of  the  money 
that  had  been  left  by  Caesar ;  and  caused  him  all  the  trouble 
he  possibly  could  in  securing  possession  of  the  inheritance. 
Notwithstanding  all  this,  the  young  Octavius  succeeded  at 
every  step,  and  checked  Antony  at  every  move.  Antony 
had  lost  much  of  his  own  influence  with  the  populace  by  fail- 
ing to  fulfill  or  even  to  promise  to  fulfill  to  them  the  provisions 
of  Caesar's  will.  And  by  refusing  to  Octavius  any  of  Caesar's 
money,  he  hoped  so  to  cripple  him  that  he  could  not  do  it. 

Octavius  promptly  assumed  all  the  obligations  of  the 
will.  He  raised  money  on  that  portion  of  the  estate  which 
fell  to  him  ;  he  persuaded  the  other  heirs  to  surrender  to 
his  use  their  shares  in  the  inheritance  ;  he  borrowed  from 
Caesar's  friends  ;  and  altogether  succeeded  in  raising  suf- 
ficient funds  to  discharge  every  obligation.  By  paying  to 
the  people  the  money  that  Caesar  had  left  them,  he  bound 
the  populace  to  himself.  At  the  time  of  Caesar's  funeral, 
one  of  the  tribunes,  a  fast  friend  to  Caesar,  but  who  unfort- 
unately bore  the  same  name  as  one  of  Caesar's  enemies, 
was  mistaken  by  the  populace  for  the  other  man,  and  in 
spite  of  his  cries  and  protestations,  was  literally  torn  to 
pieces.  The  time  came  for  the  vacant  tribunate  to  be  filled. 
Octavius  strongly  favored  a  certain  candidate.  The  people 
proposed  to  elect  Octavius  himself,  though  he  was  not  yet 
of  legal  age  to  hold  office.  Antony,  as  consul,  interfered 
to  stop  the  proceedings.  This  roused  the  spirit  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  as  they  could  not  elect  Octavius,  they  stubbornly 
refused  to  elect  anybody. 

Antony,  seeing  his  power  with  the  people  was  gone, 
next  tried  to  secure  the  support  of  the  army.  The  six  best 
legions  of  the  republic  were  stationed  in  Macedonia,  destined 


70  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

for  service  in  Parthia.  Five  of  these  legions  Antony  whee- 
dled the  Senate  into  transferring  to  him.  Next  he  intrigued 
to  have  the  province  of  Gaul  within  the  Alps  bestowed  on 
him  instead  of  the  province  of  Macedonia  which  had  al- 
ready been  given  him.  This  the  Senate  hesitated  to  do, 
and  interposed  so  many  objections  that  Antony  found  his 
purpose  about  to  be  frustrated,  and  he  made  overtures  to 
Octavius.  Octavius  received  him  favorably  ;  a  pretended 
reconciliation  was  accomplished  between  them  ;  and  by  the 
support  of  Octavius,  Antony  secured  the  change  of  prov- 
inces which  he  desired.  Antony  called  four  of  his  legions 
from  Macedonia  to  Brundusium,  and  went  to  that  place  to 
assume  command.  As  soon  as  Antony  went  to  Brundusium, 
Octavius  went  to  Campania,  to  the  colonies  of  veterans  who 
had  been  settled  there  upon  the  public  lands,  and  by  the 
offer  of  about  a  hundred  dollars  to  each  one  who  would  join 
him,  he  soon  secured  a  force  of  ten  thousand  men.  These 
he  took  to  the  north  of  Italy,  to  the  border  of  Antony's 
province,  and  put  them  in  camp  there. 

When  Antony  met  his  legions  at  Brundusium,  he  found 
them  sullen,  and  instead  of  their  greeting  him  with  acclama- 
tions they  demanded  explanations.  They  declared  that 
they  wanted  vengeance  for  Caesar's  death,  and  that  instead 
of  punishing  the  assassins,  Antony  had  dallied  with  them. 
They  called  upon  him  to  mount  the  tribunal,  and  explain  his 
conduct.  He  replied  that  it  was  not  the  place  of  a  Roman 
commander  to  explain  his  conduct,  but  to  enforce  obedience. 
Yet  he  betrayed  his  fear  of  them  by  mingling  promises  with 
his  threats  and  pledges  with  his  commands.  He  offered 
them  about  twenty  dollars  apiece,  and  drew  a  contrast  be- 
tween the  hard  service  in  Parthia,  and  the  easy  time  that 
was  before  them  in  the  province  to  which  he  was  to  take 
them.  This  did  not  satisfy  them.  He  put  some  to  death, 
yet  the  others  would  not  be  quiet.  The  agents  of  Octa- 
vius were  among  them  contrasting  the  hundred  dollars  to 
each  man^  that  he  was  paying,  with  the  paltry  twenty  dol- 


PLOT,   COUNTERPLOT,  AND    WAR.  71 

lars  that  Antony  was  Coffering.  Antony  was  obliged  to 
increase  his  bid,  but  it  was  not  yet  near  the  price  Octavius 
was  offering.  He  broke  up  the  command  into  small  bodies, 
and  ordered  them  to  march  separately  thus  along  the  coast 
of  the  Adriatic,  and  unite  again  at  Rimini,  and  he  himself 
returned  to  Rome.  He  had  barely  time  to  reach  his  home, 
when  a  messenger  arrived  with  the  word  that  one  of  his 
legions  had  gone  over  bodily  to  Octavius.  This  message 
had  scarcely  been  delivered  when  another  came  saying  that 
another  legion  had  done  likewise.  He  went  with  all  haste 
to  where  they  were,  hoping  to  win  them  back,  but  they  shut 
against  him  the  gates  of  the  city  where  they  were,  and  shot 
at  him  from  the  walls.  By  raising  his  bid  to  the  same 
amount  that  Octavius  was  paying,  he  succeeded  in  holding 
the  other  two  legions  in  allegiance  to  himself. 

War  could  be  the  only  result  of  such  counterplotting  as 
this,  and  other  circumstances  hastened  it.  Antony  now  had 
four  legions  ;  Lepidus  had  six  ;  three  were  in  Gaul  under 
the  command  of  Plancus  ;  and  Octavius  had  five.  When 
Antony  had  obtained  the  exchange  of  provinces,  the  one 
which  he  secured  —  Gaul  within  the  Alps  —  was  already 
under  the  command  of  a  pro-consul,  Decimus  Brutus.  But 
with  the  command  of  the  province  Antony  had  received 
authority  to  drive  out  of  it  any  pretender  to  the  government. 
He  commanded  Decimus  to  leave  the  province.  Decimus 
refused,  and  Antony  declared  war.  Decimus  shut  himself 
up  in  a  stronghold,  and  Antony  laid  siege  to  him  there. 
Octavius  saw  now*  an  opportunity  to  humble  Antony,  and 
strengthen  himself  —  he  offered  his  service  to  the  Senate. 

The  two  consuls  whose  term  of  office  had  expired  came 
up,  January  43,  B.  c.,  and  Octavius  joined  his  forces  to 
theirs.  Two  battles  were  fought  in  April,  in  both  of  which 
Antony  was  worsted,  though  both  the  pro-consuls  were 
slain.  Antony  left  the  field  of  battle,  and  marched  across 
the  Alps  and  joined  Lepidus.  Decimus  desired  to  follow 
with  all  the  forces  present ;  but  as  he  was  one  of  the  inur- 


72  THE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

derers  of  Caesar,  Octavius  would  not  obey  him.  Also  the 
troops  of  Octavius  declared  that  Caesar's  heir  was  their 
leader,  and  Decimus  their  enemy.  Decimus  then  marched 
also  across  the  Alps,  and  joined  his  forces  to  those  of  Plan- 
cus.  This  left  Italy  wholly  to  Octavius,  and  he  made  the 
most  of  the  opportunity.  He  demanded  that  the  Senate 
grant  him  a  triumph.  His  demand  was  only  treated  with 
contempt.  The  Senate  in  turn  sent  to  him  a  peremptory 
command  to  lead  his  army  against  "the  parricides  and 
brigands  "  that  had  joined  their  forces  in  Gaul.  He  replied 
by  sending  to  Rome  four  hundred  of  his  soldiers  to  demand 
for  him  the  consulship  for  the  year  42. 

The  soldiers  presented  their  demand  in  the  Senate  house. 
It  was  refused.  One  of  them  then  laid  his  hand  upon  his 
sword  and  declared  with  an  oath,  "If  you  do  not  grant  it, 
this  shall  obtain  it  for  him."  Cicero  replied,  "  If  this  is  the 
way  that  you  sue  for  the  consulship,  doubtless  your  chief 
will  acquire  it."  The  soldiers  returned  to  Octavius,  and 
reported  upon  their  embassy.  Octavius  with  his  legions 
immediately  crossed  the  Rubicon  and  started  for  Rome, 
giving  up  to  the  license  of  his  soldiers  all  the  country  as  he 
passed. 

As  soon  as  the  Senate  learned  that  Octavius  was  coming 
with  his  army,  they  sent  an  embassy  to  meet  him,  and  to 
tell  him  that  if  he  would  only  turn  back  they  would  grant 
everything  he  asked,  and  add  yet  above  all  about  five  hun- 
dred dollars  for  each  of  his  soldiers.  But  he,  knowing  that 
he  had  the  Senate  in  his  power,  determined  to  make  his  own 
terms  after  he  should  get  possession  of  the  city.  The 
Senate  turned  brave  again,  put  on  a  blustering  air,  and  for- 
bade the  legions  to  come  nearer  than  ninety  miles  to  the 
city.  As  two  legions  had  just  come  from  Africa,  the  Senate 
supposed  they  had  a  military  power  of  their  own.  They 
threw  up  fortifications  and  gave  the  praetors  military  com- 
mand of  the  city.  By  this  time  Octavius  and  his  army  had 
reached  Rome.  The  senators  again  suddenly  lost  all  their 


OCTAVIUS  BECOMES  CONSUL.  73 

bravery.  Such  of  them  as  had  least  hope  of  favor  fled  from 
the  city  or  hid  themselves.  Of  the  others,  each  one  for 
himself  decided  to  go  over  to  Octavius  ;  and  when  each 
one  with  great  secrecy  had  made  his  way  to  the  camp  of 
the  legions,  he  soon  found  that  all  the  others  had  done  the 
same  thing.  The  legions  and  the  praetors  who  had  been  set 
to  defend  the  city  went  over  bodily  to  Octavius.  The  gates 
were  thrown  open ;  Octavius  with  his  legions  entered  the 
city ;  the  Senate  nominated  him  for  consul ;  the  assembly 
was  convened,  and  he  was  elected  —  September  22,  43  B.  c. — 
with  his  own  cousin,  Pedius,  chosen  as  his  colleague,  and 
with  the  right  to  name  the  prefect  of  the  city.  Octavius 
became  twenty  years  old  the  next  day. 

An  inquiry  was  at  once  instituted  upon  the  murder  of 
Caesar,  and  all  the  conspirators  were  declared  outlaws  ;  but 
as  Brutus  and  Cassius,  the  two  chief  assassins,  were  in 
command  of  the  twenty  legions  in  Macedonia  and  Asia 
Minor,  Octavius  needed  more  power.  This  he  obtained  by 
forming  an  alliance  with  Antony  and  Lepidus.  These  two 
commanders  crossed  the  Alps,  and  the  three  met  on  a  small 
island  in  the  River  Reno,  near  Bologna.  There,  as  a  result 
of  their  deliberation  for  three  days, 

THE    SECOND   TRIUMVIRATE 

was  formed,  and  the  tripartition  of  the  Roman  world  was 
made. 

They  assumed  the  right  to  dispose  of  all  the  offices  of 
the  government ;  and  all  their  decrees  were  to  have  the  force 
of  law,  without  any  question,  confirmation,  or  revision  by 
either  the  Senate  or  the  people.  In  short,  they  proposed 
that  their  power  should  be  absolute  —  they  would  do  what 
they  pleased.  Yet  they  were  compelled  to  consider  the 
army.  To  secure  the  support  of  the  legions,  they  pledged 
to  them  eighteen  of  the  finest  districts  in  Italy,  with  an 
addition  of  about  a  thousand  dollars  to  each  soldier.  The 
conditions  of  the  compact  were  put  into  writing,  and  when 


74  THE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

each  of  the  triumvirs  had  taken  an  oath  faithfully  to  observe 
them,  they  were  read  to  the  troops.  The  soldiers  signified 
their  approval  upon  condition  that  Octavius  should  marry 
the  daughter  of  Antony's  wife  Fulvia.7 

When  the  powers  of  the  triumvirate  had  thus  been  made 
firm,  the  triumvirs  sat  down  "with  a  list  of  the  noblest  citi- 
zens before  them,  and  each  in  turn  pricked  [with  a  pin]  the 
name  of  him  whom  he  destined  to  perish.  Each  claimed  to 
be  ridded  of  his  personal  enemies,  and  to  save  his  own 
friends.  But  when  they  found  their  wishes  to  clash,  they  re- 
sorted without  compunction  to  mutual  concessions."  Above 
all  other  men  Cicero  was  the  one  upon  whom  Antony  desired 
to  execute  vengeance  ;  and  in  return  for  this  boon,  he  sur- 
rendered to  Octavius  his  own  uncle  on  his  mother's  side. 
Lepidus  gave  up  his  own  brother.  "As  they  proceeded, 
their  views  expanded.  They  signed  death  warrants  to  gratify 
their  friends.  As  the  list  slowly  lengthened,  new  motives 
were  discovered  for  appending  to  it  additional  names.  The 
mere  possession  of  riches  was  fatal  to  many  ;  for  the  masters 
of  so  many  legions  were  always  poor  :  the  occupation  of 
pleasant  houses  and  estates  sealed  the  fate  of  others  ;  for  the 
triumvirs  were  voluptuous  as  well  as  cruel.  Lastly,  the 
mutual  jealousy  of  the  proscribers  augmented  the  number  of 
their  victims,  each  seeking  the  destruction  of  those  who 
conspicuously  favored  his  colleagues,  and  each  exacting  a 
similar  compensation  in  return.  The  whole  number  ex- 
tended, we  are  told,  to  three  hundred  senators  and  two 
thousand  knights  ;  among  them  were  brothers,  uncles,  and 
favorite  officers  of  the  triumvirs  themselves." — Merivale* 

When  this  list  had  been  arranged,  the  triumvirs  with 
their  legions  started  to  Rome.  Before  they  reached  the  city, 
they  sent  to  the  consuls  the  names  of  seventeen  of  the  most 
prominent  citizens,  with  an  order  to  put  them  all  to  death  at 

7  The  girl's  name  was  Clodia.      She  was  Fulvia's  daughter  by  Clodius,  her 
former  husband. 

8  "Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxvi,  par.  13. 


TEE   TRIUMVIR8  ENTER  ROME.  75 

once.  Cicero  was  one  of  the  seventeen.  The  executioners 
"attacked  the  houses  of  the  appointed  victims  in  the  middle 
of  the  night :  some  they  seized  and  slew  unresisting  ;  others 
struggled  to  the  last,  and  shed  blood  in  their  own  defense  ; 
others  escaping  from  their  hands  raised  the  alarm  through- 
out the  city,  and  the  general  terror  of  all  classes,  not  know- 
ing what  to  expect,  or  who  might  feel  himself  safe,  caused  a 
violent  commotion." — Merivale.9  Cicero  had  left  the  city, 
but  he  was  overtaken  by  the  messengers  of  blood,  his  head 
and  his  hands  were  cut  off  and  carried  to  Antony,  who 
exulted  over  the  ghastly  trophies  ;  and  Fulvia  in  a  rage  of 
gloating  anger  took  the  bloody  head  and  held  it  upon  her 
knees,  and  looking  into  the  face  poured  forth  a  torrent  of 
bitter  invective  against  him  whose  face  it  was,  and  then  in  a 
perfect  abandon  of  fury  seized  from  her  hair  her  golden 
bodkin,  and  pierced  through  and  through  the  tongue  that 
had  so  often,  so  exultantly,  and  so  vilely  abused  both  her 
husbands. 

The  triumvirs  reached  Rome  one  after  another.  "  Octa- 
vius  entered  first ;  on  the  following  day  Antony  appeared  ; 
Lepidus  came  third.  Each  man  was  surrounded  by  a  legion 
and  his  praetorian  cohort.  The  inhabitants  beheld  with 
terror  these  silent  soldiers  taking  possession  of  every  point 
commanding  the  city.  Rome  seemed  like  a  place  conquered 
and  given  over  to  the  sword." — Duruy.™  A  tribune  called 
an  assembly  of  the  people  ;  a  few  came,  and  the  three  com- 
manders ' '  were  now  formally  invested  with  the  title  of  tri- 
umvirs, and  all  the  powers  they  claimed  were  conferred  upon 
them "  November  27,  B.  c.  43.  The  following  night  there 
was  posted  throughout  the  city  this  edict :  — 

"  M.  Lepidus,  Marcus  Antonius,  and  Octavius  Caesar,  chosen  trium- 
virs for  the  reconstitution  of  the  republic,  thus  declare  :  Had  not  the 
perfidy  of  the  wicked  answered  benefits  by  hatred ;  had  not  those 
whom  Caesar  in  his  clemency  spared  after  their  defeat,  enriched  and 
loaded  with  honors,  become  his  murderers,  we  too  should  disregard 

9  Id.,  par.  14.  10"  History  of  Rome,"  chap,  lix,  sec.  iv,  par.  10. 


Y6  THE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

those  who  have  declared  us  public  enemies.  But  perceiving  that 
their  malignity  can  be  conquered  by  no  benefits,  we  have  chosen  to 
forestall  our  enemies  rather  than  be  taken  unawares  by  them.  Some 
have  already  been  punished  ;  with  the  help  of  the  gods  we  shall  bring 
the  rest  to  justice.  Being  ready  to  undertake  an  expedition  against  the 
parricides  beyond  the  seas,  it  has  seemed  to  us  and  will  appear  to  you 
necessary  that  we  should  not  leave  other  enemies  behind  us.  Yet  we 
will  be  more  merciful  than  a  former  imperator,  who  also  restored  the 
ruined  republic,  and  whom  you  hailed  with  the  name  of  Felix.  Not 
all  the  wealthy,  not  all  who  have  held  office,  will  perish,  but  only 
the  most  dangerous  evil-doers.  These  offenders  we  might  have  seized 
unawares  ;  but  for  your  sakes  we  have  preferred  to  draw  up  a  list  of 
proscribed  persons  rather  than  to  order  an  execution  by  the  troops,  in 
which  harm  might  have  come  to  the  innocent.  This  then  is  our  order : 
Let  no  one  hide  any  of  those  whose  names  follow  ;  whosoever  shall  aid 
in  the  escape  of  a  proscribed  man  shall  be  himself  proscribed.  Let 
the  heads  be  brought  to  us.  As  a  reward,  a  man  of  free  condition  shall 
receive  twenty-five  thousand  Attic  drachmae,  a  slave  ten  thousand,  to- 
gether with  freedom  and  the  name  of  citizen.  The  names  of  persons 
receiving  these  rewards  shall  be  kept  secret." — Duruy.11 

Attached  to  this  document  were  one  hundred  and  thirty 
names  of  senators  and  knights  who  were  devoted  to  death. 
Another  list  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  was  almost  imme- 
diately added,  and  yet  others  followed  in  quick  succession. 
Guards  had  been  placed  at  all  the  gates,  all  places  of  ref- 
uge had  been  occupied,  and  all  means  of  escape  had  been 
cutoff.  The  slaughter  began.  "The  executioners,  armed 
with  the  prostituted  forms  of  authority,  rushed  unresisted 
and  unhindered  in  pursuit  of  their  victims.  They  found 
many  to  aid  them  in  the  search,  and  to  stimulate  their  ac- 
tivity. The  contagious  thirst  of  blood  spread  from  the  hired 
assassins  to  all  who  had  an  ancient  grudge  to  requite,  a 
future  favor  to  obtain.  Many  fell  in  the  confusion  whose 
names  were  not  included  in  the  list  of  the  proscribed.  Many 
a  private  debt  was  wiped  out  in  the  blood  of  the  creditor. 
Robbers  and  cut-throats  mingled  with  the  bitter  partisan  and 
the  private  enemy.  While  the  murderer  carried  the  head  of 
his  victim  to  fix  it  on  a  spike  before  the  rostra,  and  claim 

11  Id, 


Two   REPUBLICS. 


"THE  SAVIORS  OF   THEIR   COUNTRY."  77 

the  proffered  reward,  thfc  jackals  of  massacre  entered  the 
tenantless  house,  and  glutted  themselves  with  plunder." 
Merivale.™ 

When  the  names  of  the  published  lists  had  been  exhausted, 
and  all  their  political  enemies  had  been  slain,  the  triumvirs 
published  yet  another  list,  not  of  more  to  be  put  to  death, 
but  of  those  whose  property  should  be  confiscated.  When 
this  list  was  exhausted,  then  "all  the  inhabitants  of  Rome 
and  Italy, —  citizens  and  foreigners,  priests  and  freedmen," 
—  who  had  possessions  amounting  to  more  than  twenty 
thousand  dollars,  were  obliged  to  "lend"  to  the  triumvirs 
one-tenth  of  all  their  possessions,  and  "give"  one  year's 
income  besides.  Then,  "glutted  with  blood  and  rapine," 
Lepidus,  for  the  triumvirate,  announced  to  the  Senate  that 
the  proscription  was  at  an  end.  Octavius,  however,  reserved 
the  right  to  kill  some  more,  and  "declared  that  the  only 
limit  he  had  fixed  to  the  proscription  was  that  he  should  be 
free  to  act  as  he  pleased."  —  Suetonius.™  Then  the  fawn- 
ing Senate  voted  to  the  triumvirs  civic  crowns  as  ' '  the  sav- 
iors of  their  country." 

In  the  beginning  of  the  year  42  B.  c.,  Antony  and  Oc- 
tavius, leaving  Lepidus  in  command  of  Rome  and  Italy, 
started  to  the  East  to  destroy  Brutus  and  Cassius,  the 
murderers  of  Caesar  ;  but  it  was  summer  before  they  got  all 
their  troops  together  in  Macedonia.  Brutus  and  Cassius, 
with  their  united  forces,  had  returned  from  Asia  Minor 
into  Europe.  The  two  armies  met  at  Philippi  in  Mace- 
donia. The  forces  of  Brutus  and  Cassius  numbered  about 
one  hundred  thousand,  and  those  of  Antony  and  Octavius 
about  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand.  Two  battles, 
twenty  days  apart,  were  fought  on  the  same  ground.  In 
the  first  Cassius  lost  his  life  ;  in  the  second  the  army  of 
Brutus  was  annihilated,  and  Brutus  himself  committed 
suicide. 

12  "  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxvi,  par.  15. 

13  "  Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Augustus,  chap,  xxvli. 


78  THE   TWO    TRIUMVIRATES. 

It  became  necessary  now  to  pay  the  soldiers  the  money 
and  put  them  in  possession  of  the  land  which  had  been 
promised  them  when  the  triumvirate  was  formed.  A  sum 
equal  to  a  thousand  dollars  had  been  promised  to  each 
soldier,  and,  as  there  were  now  one  hundred  and  seventy 
thousand  soldiers,  a  sum  equal  to  one  hundred  and  sev- 
enty million  dollars  was  required.  Antony  assumed  the 
task  of  raising  the  money  from  the  wealth  of  Asia,  and 
Octavius  the  task  of  dispossessing  the  inhabitants  of  Italy 
and  distributing  their  lands  and  cities  among  the  soldiers. 
Antony's  word  to  the  people  of  Pergamos  describes  the 
situation  both  in  Italy  and  all  the  countries  of  Asia.  To 

them  he  said  :  — 

• 

"You  deserve  death  for  rebellion;  this  penalty  I  will  remit;  but  I 
want  money,  for  I  have  twenty-eight  legions,  which"  with  their  auxiliary 
battalions  amount  to  170,000  men,  besides  cavalry  and  detachments  in 
other  quarters.  I  leave  you  to  conceive  what  a  mass  of  money  must  be 
required  to  maintain  such  armaments.  My  colleague  has  gone  to  Italy 
to  divide  its  soil  among  these  soldiers,  and  to  expel,  so  to  speak,  the 
Italians  from  their  own  country.  Your  lands  we  do  not  demand ;  but 
instead  thereof  we  will  have  money.  And  when  you  hear  how  easily, 
after  all,  we  shall  be  contented,  you  will,  we  conceive,  be  satisfied  to  pay 
and  be  quit  of  us.  We  demand  only  the  same  sum  which  you  have  con- 
tributed during  the  last  two  years  to  our  adversaries  ;  that  is  to  say,  the 
tribute  of  ten  years  ;  but  our  necessities  compel  us  to  insist  upon  receiv- 
ing this  sum  within  twelve  months." — Merivale. 14 

As  the  tribute  was  much  reduced  by  the  time  it  reached 
the  coffers  of  Antony,  the  levy  was  doubled,  and  the  com- 
mand given  that  it  should  be  paid  in  two  installments  the 
same  year.  To  this  the  people  replied,  "If  you  force  us  to 
pay  the  tribute  twice  in  one  year,  give  us  two  summers  and 
two  harvests.  No  doubt  you  have  also  the  power  to  do  so." 
But  instead  of  considering  the  distress  of  the  people  caused 
by  these  most  burdensome  exactions,  "  Antony  surrounded 
himself  with  flute-players,  mountebanks,  and  dancing-girls. 
He  entered  Ephesus,  preceded  by  women  dressed  as  Bac- 

u  "  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxvii,  par.  2. 


ANTONY  AND   CLEOPATRA.  79 

chantes,  and  youths  in  the  garb  of  Fauns  and  Satyrs.  Al- 
ready he  assumed  the  attributes  of  Bacchus,  and  set  himself 
to  play  the  part  by  continual  orgies."  —  Duruy.15 

While  Cassius  was  in  Asia  Minor,  he  had  compelled 
Cleopatra,  queen  of  Egypt,  to  supply  him  with  troops  and 
money.  As  these  had  been  used  against  the  triumvirs, 
Antony  sent  from  Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  and  called  her  to  ac- 
count for  her  conduct.  She  came,  representing  Yenus,  to 
render  her  account  in  person.  And  ' '  when  she  first  met 
Mark  Antony,  she  pursed  up  his  heart  on  the  river  of 
Cydnus." 

"The  barge  she  sat  in,  like  a  burnished  throne, 
Burned  on  the  water  :  the  poop  was  beaten  gold  ; 
Purple  the  sails,  and  so  perfumed  that 
The  winds  were  love-sick  with  them  ;  the  oars  were  silver, 
Which  to  the  tune  of  flutes  kept  stroke,  and  made 
The  water,  which  they  beat,  to  follow  faster, 
As  amorous  of  their  strokes.     For  her  own  person, 
It  beggared  all  description  :  she  did  lie 
In  her  pavilion  (cloth  of  gold  and  tissue), 
O'er-picturing  that  Venus,  where  we  see 
The  fancy  out-work  nature  :  on  each  side  her, 
Stood  pretty  dimpled  boys,  like  smiling  cupids, 
With  divers  colored  fans,  whose  wind  did  seem 
To  glow  the  delicate  cheeks  which  they  did  cool, 
And  what  they  undid,  did.     .     .     . 

"Her  gentlewomen,  like  the  Nereides, 
So  many  mermaids,  tended  her  i'  the  eyes, 
And  made  their  bends  adornings :  at  the  helm 
A  seeming  mermaid  steers  ;  the  silken  tackle 
Swell  with  the  touches  of  those  flower-soft  hands, 
That  yarely  frame  the  office.     From  the  barge 
A  strange  invisible  perfume  hits  the  sense 
Of  the  adjacent  wharfs.     The  city  cast 
Her  people  out  upon  her  ;  and  Antony, 
Enthroned  in  the  market-place,  did  sit  alone, 
Whistling  to  the  air  ;  which,  but  for  vacancy, 
Had  gone  to  gaze  on  Cleopatra,  too, 
And  made  a  gap  in  nature.     .     .     . 

16  "  History  of  Rome,"  chap.  Ix,  sec.  iii,  par.  1. 


80  TEE   TWO   TRIUMVIRATES. 

"  Upon  her  landing,  Antony  sent  to  her, 
Invited  her  to  supper :  she  replied, 
It  should  be  better,  he  became  her  guest ; 
Which  she  entreated  :  Our  courteous  Antony, 
Whom  ne'er  the  word  of  '  No,*  woman  heard  speak, 
Being  barbered  ten  times  o'er,  goes  to  the  feast ; 
-  And,  for  his  ordinary,  pays  his  heart, 

For  what  his  eyes  eat  only." 

—  Shakespeare. 

Antony  went  with  Cleopatra  to  Alexandria,  B.  c.  41. 
Fulvia  died  in  the  spring  of  40.  Antony's  giddy  infatuation 
with  the  voluptuous  queen  of  Egypt  was  fast  estranging  him 
from  Octavius  and  the  Roman  people.  The  matter  was  patched 
up  for  a  little  while,  by  the  marriage  of  Antony  and  Octavia, 
the  sister  of  Octavius,  B.  c.  40 ;  but  within  two  years 
Antony  was  again  swallowed  up  in  the  charms  of  Cleopatra, 
from  whom  he  never  again  separated.  Two  children  whom 
he  had  by  her  he  named  respectively  the  Sun  and  the  Moon, 
and  when  Cleopatra  assumed  the  dress  and  professed  the 
attributes  of  Isis,  Antony  played  the  part  of  Osiris.  He 
publicly  rejected  Octavia  in  35,  divorced  her  in  32,  and  war 
was  declared  the  same  year.  The  war  began  and  ended 
with  the  naval  battle  of  Actium,  September  2,  B.  c.  31. 

In  the  midst  of  the  battle  Cleopatra  hoisted  sail  and  fled. 
Antony  left  everything  and  followed  her.  They  sailed  home 
to  Alexandria,  and  there  committed  suicide.  In  the  mean- 
time Lepidus  had  been  set  aside,  and  now,  just  thirteen  and 
one-half  years  from  the  murder  of  Caesar,  the  State,  having 
again  gone  through  the  same  course  precisely,  came  again 
to  the  exact  point  where  it  had  been  then,  only  in  worse 
hands,  and  Octa/vim  was  the  head  of  one  hundred  and  twenty 
millions  of  people,  and  SOLE  MASTEE  or  THE  ROMAN  WORLD  . 

16  "  Antony  and  Cleopatra,"  act  ii,  scene  II. 


w 

> 

H3 

H 
F 
H 

O 
"^ 

> 
Q 


CHAPTER    III. 


THE   ROMAN   MONARCHY. 

"mask  of  hypocrisy"  which  Octavius  had  assumed 
1  at  the  age  of  nineteen,  and  "  which  he  never  afterwards 
laid  aside,"  was  now  at  the  age  of  thirty-four  made  to  tell  to 
the  utmost  in  firmly  establishing  himself  in  the  place  of 
supreme  power  which  he  had  attained.  Having  before  him 
the  important  lesson  of  the  fate  of  Caesar  in  the  same  posi- 
tion, when  the  Senate  bestowed  upon  him  the  flatteries,  the 
titles,  and  the  dignities  which  it  had  before  bestowed  upon 
Caesar,  he  pretended  to  throw  them  all  back  upon  the  Senate 
and  people,  and  obliged  the  Senate  to  go  through  the  form 
of  absolutely  forcing  them  upon  him.  For  he  "was  sen- 
sible that  mankind  is  governed  by  names  ;  nor  was  he  de- 
ceived in  his  expectation  that  the  Senate  and  people  would 
submit  to  slavery  provided  they  were  respectfully  assured 
that  they  still  enjoyed  their  ancient  freedom."  He  there- 
fore ' '  wished  to  deceive  the  people  by  an  image  of  civil  lib- 
erty, and  the  armies  by  an  image  of  civil  government. "  — 
Gibbon.1 

In  this  way  he  finally  merged  in  himself  the  prerogatives 
of  all  the  regular  officers  of  the  State  —  tribune,  consul, 
prince  of  the  Senate,  pro-consul,  imperator,  censor,  Pontifex 
Maximus  —  with  all  the  titles  and  dignities  which  had  been 
given  by  the  Senate  to  him,  as  before  to  Caesar.  In  short, 
he  himself  became  virtually  the  State  ;  his  will  was  absolute. 
Having  thus  drawn  to  himself  "the  functions  of  the  Senate 
and  the  magistrate,  and  the  framing  of  the  laws,  in  which 

lu  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap.  Hi,  par.  17,  18. 

[81] 


82  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

he  was  thwarted  by  no  man,"  the  title  of  "Father  of  his 
Country  "  meant  much  more  than  ever  it  had  before.  The 
State  was  "the  common  parent"  of  the  people.  The  State 
being  now  merged  in  one  man,  when  that  man  became  the 
father  of  his  country,  he  likewise  became  the  father  of  the 
people.  And  "the  system  by  which  every  citizen  shared  in 
the  government  being  thrown  aside,  all  men  regarded  the 
orders  of  the  prince  as  the  only  rule  of  conduct  and  obedi- 
ence."-— Tacitus.*  Nor  was  this  so  merely  in  civic  things : 
it  was  equally  so  in  religious  affairs.  In  fact  there  was  in 
the  Roman  system  no  such  distinction  known  as  civil  and 
religious.  The  State  was  divine,  therefore  that  which  was 
civil  was  in  itself  religious.  One  man  now  having  become 
the  State,  it  became  necessary  that  some  title  should  be 
found  which  would  fit  this  new  dignity  and  express  this  new 
power. 

The  Senate  had  exhausted  the  vocabulary  of  flattering 
titles  in  those  which  it  had  given  to  Caesar.  Although  all 
these  were  now  given  to  Octavius,  there  was  none  amongst 
them  which  could  properly  define  the  new  dignity  which  he 
possessed.  Much  anxious  thought  was  given  to  this  great 
question.  "At  last  he  fixed  upon  the  epithet  'Augustus,'  a 
name  which  no  man  had  borne  before,  and  which,  on  the 
contrary,  had  been  applied  to  things  the  most  noble,  the 
most  venerable,  and  the  most  sacred.  The  rites  of  the  gods 
were  called  august ;  their  temples  were  august.  The  word 
itself  was  derived  from  the  holy  auguries  /  it  was  connected 
in  meaning  with  the  abstract  term  ' '  authority, "  and  with  all 
that  increases  and  flourishes  upon  earth.  The  use  of  this 
glorious  title  could  not  fail  to  smooth  the  way  to  the  general 
acceptance  of  the  divine  character  of  the  mortal  who  was 
deemed  worthy  to  bear  it.  The  Senate  had  just  decreed  the 
divinity  of  the  defunct  Caesar  ;  the  courtiers  were  beginning 
now  to  insinuate  that  his  successor,  while  yet  alive,  enjoyed 
an  effluence  from  deity ;  the  poets  were  even  suggesting 

2  "  Annals,"  book  i,  chap.  4. 


AUGUSTUS. 


THE  FATHER    OF   THE  PEOPLE.  83 

that  altars  should  be  raised  to  him ;  and  in  the  provinces, 
among  the  subjects  of  the  State  at  least,  temples  to  his 
divinity  were  actually  rising,  and  the  cult  of  Augustus  was 
beginning  to  assume  a  name,  a  ritual,  and  a  priesthood.— 
' '  Encyclopedia  Britannica. " 3 

He  tyrannized  over  the  nobles  by  his  power,  and  held 
the  affections  of  the  populace  by  his  munificence.  "In  the 
number,  variety,  and  magnificence  of  his  public  spectacles, 
he  surpassed  all  former  example.  Four  and  twenty  times, 
he  says,  he  treated  the  people  with  games  upon  his  own 
account,  and  three  and  twenty  times  for  such  magistrates  as 
were  either  absent,  or  not  able  to  afford  the  expense.  .  .  . 
fle  entertained  the  people  with  wrestlers  in  the  Campus 
Martius,  where  wooden  seats  were  erected  for  the  purpose  ; 
and  also  with  a  naval  fight,  for  which  he  excavated  the 
ground  near  the  Tiber."  In  order  that  the  people  might  all 
go  to  these  special  shows,  he  stationed  guards  through  the 
streets  to  keep  the  houses  from  being  robbed  while  the 
dwellers  were  absent.  ' '  He  displayed  his  munificence  to 
all  ranks  of  the  people  on  various  occasions.  Moreover, 
upon  his  bringing  the  treasure  belonging  to  the  kings  of 
Egypt  into  the  city,  in  his  Alexandrian  triumph,  he  made 
money  so  plentiful  that  interest  fell,  and  the  price  of  land 
rose  considerably.  And  afterwards,  as  often  as  large  sums 
of  money  came  into  his  possession  by  means  of  confiscations, 
he  would  lend  it  free  of  interest,  for  a  fixed  term,  to  such  as 
could  give  security  for  the  double  of  what  was  borrowed. 
The  estate  necessary  to  qualify  a  senator,  instead  of  eight 
hundred  thousand  sesterces,  the  former  standard,  he  ordered, 
for  the  future,  to  be  twelve  hundred  thousand  ;  and  to  those 
who  had  not  so  much,  he  made  good  the  deficiency.  He 
often  made  donations  to  the  people,  but  generally  of  differ- 
ent sums  ;  sometimes  four  hundred,  sometimes  three  hundred, 
or  two  hundred  and  fifty  sesterces  :  upon  which  occasions,  he 
extended  his  bounty  even  to  young  boys,  who  before  were 

3 Article  "Augustus." 


84  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

not  used  to  receive  anything,  until  they  arrived  at  eleven 
years  of  age.  In  a  scarcity  of  corn,  he  would  frequently  let 
them  have  it  at  a  very  low  price,  or  none  at  all,  and  doubled 
the  number  of  the  money  tickets." — Suetonius.* 

It  occurred  to  him  that  he  ought  to  abolish  the  distribu- 
tion of  grain  at  public  expense,  as  he  declared  that  it  was 
"working  unmitigated  evil,  retarding  the  advance  of  agri- 
culture, and  cutting  the  sinews  of  industry."  But  he  was 
afraid  to  do  it,  lest  some  one  would  take  advantage  of  the 
opportunity  and  ascend  to  power  by  restoring  it.  His  own 
words  are  these  :  "I  was  much  inclined  to  abolish  forever 
the  practice  of  allowing  the  people  corn  at  the  public  expense, 
because  they  trust  so  much  to  it,  that  they  are  too  lazy  to 
till  their  lands  ;  but  I  did  not  persevere  in  my  design,  as  I 
felt  sure  that  the  practice  would  sometime  or  other  be  revived 
by  some  one  ambitious  of  popular  favor." — Suetonius.5 

In  public  and  political  life  a  confirmed  and  constant 
hypocrite,  in  private  and  domestic  life  he  was  no  less.  He 
was  so  absolutely  calculating  that  he  actually  wrote  out  be- 
forehand what  he  wished  to  say  to  his  friends,  and  even  to  his 
wife.  He  married  Clodia  merely  for  political  advantage, 
although  at  that  time  she  was  scarcely  of  marriageable  age. 
He  soon  put  her  away,  and  married  Scribonia.  Her,  too, 
he  soon  put  away,  "for  resenting  too  freely  the  excessive 
influence  which  one  of  his  mistresses  had  gained  over  him  " 
(Suetonius6},  and  immediately  took  Livia  Drusilla  from  her 
wedded  husband.  Her  he  kept  all  the  rest  of  his  days  ;  for, 
instead  of  resenting  any  of  his  lascivious  excesses,  she  con- 
nived at  them. 

By  Scribonia  he  had  a  daughter  —  Julia.  Her  he  gave 
first  to  his  sister's  son,  who  soon  died  ;  and  then  he  gave 
her  to  her  brother-in-law,  Marcus  Agrippa,  who  was  already 
married  to  her  cousin  by  whom  he  had  children.  Never- 

4  "Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  chap.  xli. 

5 Id.,  chap.  xlii.     Merivale,  "Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxii,  par.  4. 
6  Id.,  chap.  Ixix. 


Two   REPUBLICS. 


TIBERIUS. 


THE  ACCESSION  OF    TIBERIUS.  85 

theless  Agrippa  was  obliged  to  put  away  his  wife  and  children, 
and  take  Julia.  Agrippa  likewise  soon  died  ;  then  Tiberius 
was  obliged  to  put  away  his  wife,  by  whom  he  already  had  a 
son  and  who  was  soon  to  become  a  mother  again,  in  order 
that  he  might  be  the  step-son  of  the  emperor  by  becoming 
Julia's  third  husband.  By  this  time,  however,  Julia  had 
copied  so  much  of  her  father's  wickedness  that  Tiberius 
could  not  live  with  her  ;  and  her  daughter  had  copied  so 
much  of  hers,  that  ' '  the  two  Julias,  his  daughter  and  grand- 
daughter, abandoned  themselves  to  such  courses  of  lewdness 
and  debauchery,  that  he  banished  them  both  "  (Suetonius T), 
and  even  had  thoughts  of  putting  to  death  the  elder  Julia. 

Yet  Augustus,  setting  such  an  example  of  wickedness  as 
this,  presumed  to  enact  laws  punishing  in  others  the  same 
things  which  were  habitually  practiced  by  himself.  But  all 
these  evil  practices  were  so  generally  followed,  that  laws 
would  have  done  no  good  by  whomsoever  enacted,  much 
less  would  they  avail  when  issued  by  such  a  person  as  he. 

Augustus  died  at  the  age  of  seventy-six,  August  19, 
A.  D.  14,  and  was  succeeded  by  — 

TIBERIUS. 

Forty-three  years  of  the  sole  authority  of  Augustus  had 
established  the  principle  of  absolutism  in  government,  but 
"the  critical  moment  for  a  government  is  that  of  its  founder's 
death."  It  was  now  to  be  discovered  whether  that  principle 
was  firmly  fixed  ;  but  Tiberius  was  fifty-six  years  old,  and 
had  been  a  careful  student  of  Augustus,  and  though  at  his 
accession  the  new  principle  of  government  was  put  to  its  se- 
verest test,  Tiberius  made  Augustus  his  model  in  all  things  ; 
"continued  his  hypocritical  moderation,  and  made  it,  so  to 
speak,  the  rule  of  the  imperial  government."  -Dwruy.8 

Though  he  immediately  assumed  the  imperial  authority, 
like  his  model,  "He  affected  by  a  most  impudent  piece  of 

7  "  Lives  of  tbe  Caesars,"  Augustus,  chap.  Ixv. 
""History  of  Rome,"  chap.  Ixxif,  sec.  i,  par.  9. 


86  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

acting  to  refuse  it  for  a  long  time  ;  one  while  sharply  repre- 
hending his  friends  who  entreated  him  to  accept  it,  as  little 
knowing  what  a  monster  the  government  was ;  another 
while  keeping  in  suspense  the  Senate  when  they  implored 
him  and  threw  themselves  at  his  feet,  by  ambiguous  answers 
and  a  crafty  kind  of  dissimulation  ;  in  so  much  that  some 
were  out  of  patience  and  one  cried  out  during  the  confusion, 
'  Either  let  him  accept  it  or  decline  it  at  once  ; '  and  a  second 
told  him  to  his  face  :  '  Others  are  slow  to  perform  what  they 
promise,  but  you  are  slow  to  promise  what  you  actually  per- 
form.' At  last  as  if  forced  to  it,  and  complaining  of  the 
miserable  and  burdensome  service  imposed  upon  him,  he 
accepted  the  government."  —/SWefomW.9 

The  purpose  of  all  this  was,  as  with  Augustus,  to  cause 
the  Senate  by  fairly  forcing  imperial  honors  upon  him, 
firmly  to  ally  itself  to  the  imperial  authority  by  making  itself 
the  guardian  of  that  power  ;  so  that  when  any  danger  should 
threaten  the  emperor,  the  Senate  would  thus  stand  pledged 
to  defend  him.  And  dangers  were  at  this  time  so  thick 
about  Tiberius  that  he  declared  he  had  "  a  wolf  by  the  ears." 

The  principle  thing  that  had  marked  his  accession  was 
the  murder  of  Agrippa  Posthumus,  the  son  of  Agrippa  the 
minister  of  Augustus  ;  and  now  a  slave  of  Agrippa's  had 
got  together  a  considerable  force  to  avenge  his  master's 
death.  "Lucius  Scribonius  Libo,  a  senator  of  the  first  dis- 
tinction, was  secretly  fomenting  a  rebellion,  and  the  troops 
both  in  Illyricum  and  Germany  were  mutinous.  Both  ar- 
mies insisted  upon  high  demands,  particularly  that  their  pay 
should  be  made  equal  to  that  of  the  praetorian  guards. 
The  army  in  Germany  absolutely  refused  to  acknowledge 
a  prince  who  was  not  their  own  choice,  and  urged  with  all 
possible  importunity  Germanicus,  who  commanded  them,  to 
take  the  government  on  himself,  though  he  obstinately  re- 
fused it."  —  Suetonius.™ 

9 "Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Tiberius,  chap.  xxlv. 
10  Id.,  chap.  xxv. 


THE  ENEMY  OF  PUBLIC  LIBERTY.  87 

All  these  dangers  were  soon  passed,  and  Tiberius  pre- 
tending to  be  the  servant  of  the  Senate,  "assumed  the  sov- 
ereignty by  slow  degrees,"  and  the  Senate  allowed  nothing 
to  check  its  extravagance  in  bestowing  titles,  honors,  and 
powers,  for  "such  was  the  pestilential  character  of  those 
times,  so  contaminated  with  adulation,  that  not  only  the 
first  nobles,  whose  obnoxious  splendor  found  protection 
only  in  obsequiousness,  but  all  who  had  been,  consuls,  a 
great  part  of  such  as  had  been  praetors,  and  even  many 
of  the  inferior  senators,  strove  for  priority  in  the  fulsome- 
ness  and  extravagance  of  their  votes.  There  is  a  tradition 
that  Tiberius,  as  often  as  he  went  out  of  the  Senate,  was 
wont  to  cry  out  in  Greek,  '  How  fitted  for  slavery  are 
these  men  !  '  Yes,  even  Tiberius,  the  enemy  of  public 
liberty,  nauseated  .the  crouching  tameness  of  his  slaves." 
—  Tacitus. n 

This  course  of  conduct  he  continued  through  nine  years, 
and  his  reign  was  perhaps  as  mild  during  this  time  as  that 
of  any  other  Roman  would  have  been  ;  but  when  at  last 
he  felt  himself  secure  in  the  position  where  he  was  placed 
above  all  law,  there  was  no  enormity  that  he  did  not  commit. 

One  man  being  n<*v  the  State,  and  that  one  man  being 
"divine,"  high  treason — violated  majesty  —  became  the 
most  common  crime,  and  the  "universal  resource  in  accu- 
sations." In  former  times,  "If  any  one  impaired  the  maj- 
esty of  the  Roman  people  by  betraying  an  army,  by  exciting 
sedition  among  the  Commons,  in  short,  by  any  maladminis- 
tration of  the  public  affairs,  the  actions  were  matter  of  trial, 
but  words  were  free. " — Tacitus. 12  But  now  the  law  embraced 
"not  words  only,  but  a  gesture,  an  involuntary  forgetfulness, 
an  indiscreet  curiosity." — Duruy.13  More  than  this,  as  the 
emperor  was  the  embodiment  of  the  divinity  of  the  Roman 
State,  this  divinity  was  likewise  supposed  to  be  reflected  in 
the  statues  and  images  of  him.  Any  disrespect,  any  slight, 

11  "Annals,"  book  iii,  chap.  Ixv.  12/d.,  book  1,  chap.  Ixxii. 

13  "  History  of  Koine  "  chap.  Ixxiii,  par.  2. 


88  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

any  indifference,  any  carelessness  intentional  or  otherwise, 
shown  toward  any  such  statue,  or  image,  or  picture,  was 
considered  as  referring  to  him  ;  was  violative  of  his  majesty  ; 
and  was  high  treason.  If  any  one  counted  as  sold,  a  statue 
of  the  emperor  with  the  field  in  which  it  stood,  even  though 
he  had  made  and  set  up  the  statue  himself ;  any  one  who 
should  throw  a  stone  at  it ;  any  one  who  should  take  away 
its  head  ;  any  one  who  should  melt  the  bronze  or  use  for  any 
profane  purpose  the  stone,  even  of  a  broken  or  mutilated 
image  or  statue, —  all  were  alike  guilty  of  high  treason. 

Yet  more  than  this,  in  all  cases  of  high  treason  when  the 
accused  was  found  guilty,  one  fourth  of  his  estate  was  by 
law  made  sure  to  the  informer.  "Thus  the  informers,  a 
description  of  men  called  into  existence  to  prey  upon  the 
vitals  of  society  and  never  sufficiently  restrained  even  by 
penalties,  were  now  encouraged  by  rewards." — Tacitus.™ 

Bearing  these  facts  in  mind,  it  is  easy  to  understand  the 
force  of  that  political  turn  which  the  priests  and  Pharisees 
of  Jerusalem  took  upon  Pilate  in  their  charges  against  Christ : 
"If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend  :  who- 
soever maketh  himself  a  king  speaketh  against  Caesar." 
John  xix,  12.  On  account  of  the  furious^jealousy  of  Tiberius 
and  his  readiness  to  welcome  the  reports  of  informers,  the 
priests  and  Pharisees  knew  full  well,  and  so  did  Pilate,  that 
if  a  deputation  should  be  sent  to  Rome  accusing  him  of  high 
treason  in  sanctioning  the  kingship  of  a  Jew,  Pilate  would 
be  called  to  Rome  and  crucified. 

Thus  in  Tiberius  the  government  of  Rome  became  "  a 
furious  and  crushing  despotism."  The  emperor  being  above 
all  law,  forgot  all  restraint,  and  "abandoned  himself  to 
every  species  of  cruelty,  never  wanting  occasions  of  one  kind 
or  another,  to  serve  as  a  pretext.  He  first  fell  upon  the 
friends  and  acquaintances  of  his  mother,  then  those  of  his 
grandsons  and  his  daughter-in-law,  and  lastly  those  of  Se- 
janus,  after  whose  death  he  became  cruel  in  the  extreme." 

14  "Annals,"  book  iv,  chap.  xxx. 


A  FURIOUS  AND  CRUSHING  DESPOTISM.  89 

Sejanus  was  his  chief  minister  of  State  and  his  special  friend 
and  favorite  —  a  worthy  favorite,  too.  Tiberius,  at  his  par- 
ticular solicitation,  retired  to  the  island  of  Capri,  where  he 
attempted  to  imitate  the  lascivious  ways  of  all  the  gods  and 
goddesses  at  once. 

Sejanus,  left  in  command  of  the  empire,  aspired  to  pos- 
sess it  in  full.  He  had  already  put  away  his  own  wife,  and 
poisoned  the  son  of  Tiberius  that  he  might  marry  his  widow. 
His  scheme  was  discovered  ;  he  was  strangled  by  the  public 
executioner,  and  torn  to  pieces  by  the  populace.  Then, 
under  the  accusation  of  being  friends  of  Sejanus,  a  great 
number  of  people  were  first  imprisoned,  and  shortly  after- 
ward, without  even  the  form  of  a  trial,  Tiberius  ' '  ordered 
all  who  were  in  prison  under  accusation  of  attachment  to 
Sejanus,  to  be  put  to  death.  There  lay  the  countless  mass  of 
slain  —  of  every  sex  and  age —  the  illustrious  and  the  mean  ; 
some  dispersed,  others  collected  in  heaps  ;  nor  was  it  per- 
mitted to  their  friends  or  kindred  to  be  present,  or  to  shed  a 
tear  over  them,  or  any  longer  even  to  go  and  see  them  ;  but 
guards  were  placed  around,  who  marked  signs  of  sorrow  in 
each,  and  attended  the  putrid  bodies  till  they  were  dragged 
to  the  Tiber ;  where,  floating  in  the  stream,  or  driven  upon 
the  banks,  none  dared  to  burn  them,  none  to  touch  them. 
Even  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  humanity  was  intercepted 
by  the  violence  of  fear ;  and  in  proportion  as  cruelty  pre- 
vailed, commiseration  was  stifled." — Tacitm.15 

After  the  example  of  Augustus,  and  to  satisfy  the  clamors 
of  the  people,  he  loaned  money  without  interest  for  three 
years  to  all  who  wanted  to  borrow.  He  first  compelled  "all 
money-lenders  to  advance  two  thirds  of  their  capital  on  land, 
and  the  debtors  to  pay  off  at  once  the  same  proportion  of 
their  debts. "  This  was  found  insufficient  to  meet  all  the  de- 
mands, and  he  loaned  from  the  public  treasury  about  five  mill- 
ions of  dollars.  In  order  to  obtain  money  to  meet  this  and 
other  drafts  on  the  public  treasury,  ' '  he  turned  his  mind  to 

16  /<*.,  book  vi,  chap.  19. 


90  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

sheer  robbery.  It  is  certain  that  Cneius  Lentulus,  the  augur, 
a  man  of  vast  estate,  was  so  terrified  and  worried  by  his 
threats  and  importunities,  that  he  was  obliged  to  make  him 
his  heir.  .  .  .  Several  persons,  likewise  of  the  first  distinc- 
tion in  Gaul,  Spain,  Syria,  and  Greece,  had  their  estates 
confiscated  upon  such  despicably  trifling  and  shameless  pre- 
tenses, that  against  some  of  them  no  other  charge  was  pre- 
ferred than  that  they  held  large  sums  of  ready  money  as 
part  of  their  property.  Old  immunities,  the  rights  of  min- 
ing, and  of  levying  tolls,  were  taken  from  several  cities  and 
private  persons. "  -  Suetonius. 16 

As  for  anything  more  about  "this  monster  of  his  species," 
we  shall  only  say  in  the  words  of  Suetonius,  "It  would  be 
tedious  to  relate  all  the  numerous  instances  of  his  cruelty  ; 
suffice  it  to  give  a  few  examples,  in  their  different  kinds. 
Not  a  day  passed  without  the  punishment  of  some  person  or 
other,  not  excepting  holidays,  or  those  appropriated  to  the 
worship  of  the  gods.  Some  were  tried  even  on  New  Year's 
Day.  Of  many  who  were  condemned,  their  wives  and 
children  shared  the  same  fate  ;  and  for  those  who  were 
sentenced  to  death,  the  relations  were  forbid  to  put  on 
mourning. 

"Considerable  rewards  were  voted  for  the  prosecutors, 
and  sometimes  for  the  witnesses  also.  The  information  of 
any  person,  without  exception,  was  taken,  and  all  offenses 
were  capital,  even  speaking  a  few  words,  though  without 
any  ill  intention.  A  poet  was  charged  with  abusing  Aga- 
memnon ;  and  a  historian,  for  calling  Brutus  and  Cassius 
'  the  last  of  the  Romans.'  The  two  authors  were  immediately 
called  to  account,  and  their  writings  suppressed,  though 
they  had  been  well  received  some  years  before,  and  read  in 
the  hearing  of  Augustus.  Some  who  were  thrown  into 
prison,  were  not  only  denied  the  solace  of  study,  but  de- 
barred from  all  company  and  conversation.  Many  persons, 
when  summoned  to  trial,  stabbed  themselves  at  home,  to 

9 

16  "  Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Tiberius,  chaps,  xlviii,  xlix. 


CALIGULA. 


ACCESSION  OF   CALIGULA.  91 

avoid  the  distress  and  ignominy  of  a  public  condemnation, 
which  they  were  certain  would  ensue.  Others  took  poison 
in  the  Senate  house.  The  wounds  were  bound  up,  and  all 
who  had  not  expired,  were  carried,  half  dead,  and  panting 
for  life,  to  prison.  Those  who  were  put  to  death,  were 
thrown  down  the  Gemonian  stairs,  and  then  dragged  into 
the  Tiber.  In  one  day,  twenty  were  treated  in  this  manner, 
and  amongst  them  women  and  boys.  Because,  according  to 
an  ancient  custom,  it  was  not  lawful  to  strangle  virgins,  the 
young  girls  were  first  deflowered  by  the  executioner,  and 
afterwards  strangled. 

"  Those  who  were  desirous  to  die,  were  forced  to  live. 
For  he  thought  death  so  slight  a  punishment,  that  upon 
hearing  that  Carnulius,  one  of  the  accused,  who  was  under 
prosecution,  had  killed  himself,  he  exclaimed,  '  Carnulius  has 
escaped  me.'  In  calling  over  his  prisoners,  when  one  of 
them  requested  the  favor  of  a  speedy  death,  he  replied,  '  You 
are  not  yet  restored  to  favor.'  A  man  of  consular  rank 
writes  in  his  annals  that  at  table,  where  he  himself  was 
present  with  a  large  company,  he  was  suddenly  asked  aloud 
by  a  dwarf  who  stood  by  amongst  the  buffoons,  why  Pa- 
conius,  who  was  under  a  prosecution  for  treason,  lived  so 
long.  Tiberius  immediately  reprimanded  him  for  his  pert- 
ness,  but  wrote  to  the  Senate  a  few  days  after,  to  proceed 
without  delay  to  the  punishment  of  Paconius. " —  Suetonius. " 

Tiberius  died  March  16,  A.  D.  37,  in  the  seventy-eighth 
year  of  his  age  and  the  twenty-third  year  of  his  reign,  and 
was  succeeded  by  — 

CALIGULA. 

Caligula  was  the  son  of  Germanicus,  who  was  the  adopted 
son  of  Tiberius.  He  was  born  and  brought  up  in  the  camp. 
When  he  grew  large  enough  to  run  about,  the  soldiers  made 
him  a  pair  of  boots  —  caliga,  —  after  the  pattern  of  their  own, 
and  from  that  he  got  his  name  of  ' '  Caligula, "  that  is,  Little 
Boots.  His  real  name  was  Caius.  He  was  now  twenty-five 

17  "  Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Tiberius,  chaps.  1x1,  Ixli. 


92  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

years  old,  and  had  been  with  Tiberius  for  the  last  five  years. 
"  Closely  aping  Tiberius,  he  put  on  the  same  dress  as  he  did 
from  day  to  day,  and  in  his  language  differed  little  from  him. 
Whence  the  shrewd  observation  of  Passienus  the  orator, 
afterward  so  famous,  '  that  never  was  a  better  slave  nor  a 
worse  master. ' '  —  Tacitus. 18  He  imitated  Tiberius  in  his  sav- 
age disposition,  and  the  exercise  of  his  vicious  propensities, 
as  closely  as  he  did  in  his  dress  and  language.  If  he  were 
not  worse  than  Tiberius,  it  was  only  because  it  was  impos- 
sible to  be  worse. 

Like  his  pattern,  he  began  his  reign  with  such  an  appear- 
ance of  gentleness  and  genuine  ability,  that  there  was 
universal  rejoicing  among  the  people  out  of  grateful  remem- 
brance of  Germanicus,  and  among  the  soldiers  and  provin- 
cials who  had  known  him  in  his  childhood.  As  he  followed 
the  corpse  of  Tiberius  to  its  burning,  "He  had  to  walk  amidst 
altars,  victims,  and  lighted  torches,  with  prodigious  crowds 
of  people  everywhere  attending  him,  in  transports  of  joy, 
and  calling  him,  besides  other  auspicious  names,  by  those  of 
'their  star,'  'their  chick,'  'their  pretty  puppet,'  and  'bant- 
ling.' .  .  .  Caligula  himself  inflamed  this  devotion,  by  prac- 
tising all  the  arts  of  popularity." — Suetonius.19  This 
appearance  of  propriety  he  kept  up  for  eight  months,  and 
then,  having  become  giddy  with  the  height  at  which  he 
stood,  and  drunken  with  the  possession  of  absolute  power, 
he  ran  wildly  and  greedily  into  all  manner  of  excesses. 

He  gave  himself  the  titles  of  "Dutiful,"  "The  Pious," 
"The  Child  of  the  Camp,  the  Father  of  the  Armies,"  "The 
Greatest  and  Best  Caesar." — Suetonius.™  He  caused  him- 
self to  be  worshiped,  not  only  in  his  images,  but  in  his  own 
person.  Among  the  gods,  Castor  and  Pollux  were  twin 
brothers  representing  the  sun,  and  were  the  sons  of  Jupiter. 
Caligula  would  place  himself  between  the  statues  of  the  twin 
brothers  there  to  be  worshiped  by  all  votaries.  And  they 

18  "  Annals,"  book  vi,  chap.  xx. 
19  "Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Caligula,  chaps,  xiii,  xv.        20/d.,  chap.  xxii. 


CALIGULA  IMITATES  THE  GODS.  93 

worshiped  him,  too  ;  some  saluting  him  as  Jupiter  Latialis, 
that  is,  the  Roman  Jupiter,  the  guardian  of  the  Roman 
people.  He  caused  all  the  images  of  the  gods  that  were 
famous  either  for  beauty  or  popularity,  to  be  brought  from 
Greece,  and  their  heads  taken  off  and  his  put  on  instead,  and 
then  sent  them  back  to  be  worshiped.  He  set  up  a  temple, 
and  established  a  priesthood  in  honor  of  his  own  divinity  ; 
and  in  the  temple  he  set  up  a  statue  of  gold  the  exact  image 
of  himself,  which  he  caused  to  be  dressed  every  day  exactly 
as  he  was.  The  sacrifices  which  were  to  be  offered  in  the 
temple,  were  flamingos,  peacocks,  bustards,  guineas,  turkeys, 
and  pheasants,  each  kind  offered  on  successive  days.  ' '  The 
most  opulent  persons  in  the  city  offered  themselves  as  candi- 
dates for  the  honor  of  being  his  priests,  and  purchased  it 
successively  at  an  immense  price."-  —  Suetonius. Zl 

Castor  and  Pollux  had  a  sister  who  corresponded  to  the 
moon.  Caligula  therefore  on  nights  when  the  moon  was 
full,  would  invite  her  to  come  and  stay  with  him.  This 
Jupiter  Latialis  placed  himself  on  full  and  familiar  equality 
with  Jupiter  Capitolinus.  He  would  walk  up  to  the  other 
Jupiter  and  whisper  in  his  ear,  and  then  turn  his  own  ear,  as 
if  listening  for  a  reply.  Not  only  had  Augustus  and  Romu- 
lus taken  other  men's  wives,  but  Castor  and  Pollux,  in  the 
myth,  had  gone  to  a  double  wedding,  and  after  the  marriage 
had  carried  off  both  the  brides  with  them.  Caligula  did  the 
same  thing.  He  went  to  the  wedding  of  Caius  Piso,  and 
from  the  wedding  supper  carried  off  the  bride  with  himself, 
and  the  next  day  issued  a  proclamation  "that  he  had  got  a 
wife  as  Romulus  and  Augustus  had  dono  , ''  but  in  a  few 
days  he  put  her  away,  and  two  years  afterward  he  ban- 
ished her. 

Lollia  Paulina  was  the  wife  of  a  proconsul.     She  was 

with  her  husband  in  one  of  the  provinces  where  he  was  in 

command  of  an  army.  ,  Caligula  heard  somebody  say  that 

her  grandmother  had  been  a  very  beautiful  woman.     He  im- 

9 


94  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

mediately  sent  and  bad  Lollia  Paulina  brought  from  her 
husband,  and  made  her  his  wife  ;  and  her  also  soon  after- 
wards he  put  away.  But  he  found  a  perfect  wanton,  by  the 
name  of  Csesonia,  who  was  neither  handsome  nor  young,  and 
her  he  kept  constantly.  He  lived  in  incest  with  all  three  of 
his  sisters,  but  one  of  them,  Drusilla,  was  a  special  favorite. 
Her  he  took  from  her  husband,  a  man  of  consular  rank,  and 
made  her  his  wife  and  kept  her  so  as  long  as  she  lived,  and 
when  she  died,  he  ordered  a  public  mourning  for  her,  during 
which  time  he  made  it  a  capital  offense  for  anybody  to  laugh, 
or  bathe,  or  eat  with  his  parents  or  his  own  family  ;  and 
ever  afterwards  his  most  solemn  oath  was  to  sware  by  the 
divinity  of  Drusilla. 

He  was  so  prodigal  that  in  less  than  a  year,  besides  the 
regular  revenue  of  the  empire,  he  spent  the  sum  of  about 
one  hundred  millions  of  dollars.  He  built  a  bridge  of  boats 
across  the  Gulf  of  Baiae,  from  Baiae  to  Puteoli,  a  distance  of 
three  and  a  half  miles.  He  twice  distributed  to  the  people 
nearly  fifteen  dollars  apiece,  and  often  gave  splendid  feasts 
to  the  Senate  and  to  the  knights  with  their  families,  at  which 
he  presented  official  garments  to  the  men,  and  purple  scarfs 
to  the  women  and  children.  He  exhibited  a  large  number 
of  games  continuing  all  day.  Sometimes  he  would  throw 
large  sums  of  money  and  other  valuables  to  the  crowd  to 
be  scrambled  for.  He  likewise  made  public  feasts  at  which, 
to  every  man,  he  would  give  a  basket  of  bread  with  other 
victuals.  He  would  exhibit  stage  plays  in  different  parts  of 
the  city  at  night  time,  and  cause  the  whole  city  to  be  illumi- 
nated ;  he  exhibited  these  games  and  public  plays  not  only 
in  Eome,  but  in  Sicily,  Syracuse,  and  Gaul. 

As  for  himself,  in  his  feasts  he  exerted  himself  to  set  the 
grandest  suppers  and  the  strangest  dishes,  at  which  he  would 
drink  pearls  of  immense  value,  dissolved  in  vinegar,  and 
serve  up  loaves  of  bread  and  other  victuals  modeled  in 
gold.  He  built  two  ships  each  of  ten  banks  of  oars,  the 
poops  of  which  were  made  to  blaze  with  jewels,  with  sails  of 


CALIGULA'S  PRODIGALITY.  95 

various  parti-colors,  with  baths,  galleries,  and  saloons  ;  in 
which  he  would  sail  along  the  coast  feasting  and  reveling, 
with  the  accompaniments  of  dancing  and  concerts  of  music. 
At  one  of  these  revels  he  made  a  present  of  nearly  one  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars  to  a  favorite  charioteer.  His  favorite 
horse  he  called  Incitatus, —  go  ahead, —  and  on  the  day  be- 
fore the  celebration  of  the  games  of  the  circus,  he  would  set 
a  guard  of  soldiers  to  keep  perfect  quiet  in  the  neighborhood, 
that  the  repose  of  Go-ahead  might  not  be  disturbed.  This 
horse  he  arrayed  in  purple  and  jewels,  and  built  for  him  a 
marble  stable  with  an  ivory  manger.  He  would  occasionally 
have  the  horse  eat  at  the  imperial  table,  and  at  such  times 
would  feed  him  on  gilded  grain  in  a  golden  basin  of  the  fin- 
est workmanship.  He  proposed  at  last  to  make  the  horse 
consul  of  the  empire. 

Having  spent  all  the  money,  though  an  enormous  sum, 
that  had  been  laid  up  by  Tiberius,  it  became  necessary  to 
raise  funds  sufficient  for  his  extravagance,  and  to  raise  it  he 
employed  ' '  every  mode  of  false  accusation,  confiscation, 
and  taxation  that  could  be  invented."  He  commanded  that 
the  people  should  make  their  wills  in  his  favor.  He  even 
caused  this  rule  to  date  back  as  far  as  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Tiberius,  and  from  that  time  forward  any  centurion 
of  the  first  rank  who  had  not  made  Tiberius  or  Caligula  his 
heir,  his  will  was  annulled,  and  all  his  property  confiscated. 
The  wills  of  all  others  were  set  aside  if  any  person  would 
say  that  the  maker  had  intended  to  make  the  emperor  his 
heir.  This  caused  those  who  were  yet  living  to  make  him 
joint  heir  with  their  friends  or  with  their  children.  If  he 
found  that  such  wills  had  been  made  and  the  maker  did  not 
die  soon,  he  declared  that  they  were  only  making  game  of 
him,  and  sent  them  poisoned  cakes. 

The  remains  of  the  paraphernalia  of  his  spectacles,  the 
furniture  of  the  palace  occupied  by  Augustus  and  Tiberius, 
and  all  the  clothes,  furniture,  slaves,  and  even  freedmen  be- 
longing to  his  sisters  whom  he  banished,  were  put  up  at 


96  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

auction,  and  the  prices  were  run  up  so  high  as  to  ruin  the 
purchasers.  At  one  of  these  sales  a  certain  Aponius  Satur- 
ninus,  sitting  on  a  bench,  became  sleepy  and  fell  to  nodding  ; 
the  emperor  noticed  it,  and  told  the  auctioneer  not  to  over- 
look the  bids  of  the  man  who  was  nodding  so  often.  Every 
nod  was  taken  as  a  new  bid,  and  when  the  sale  was  over, 
the  dozing  bidder  found  himself  in  possession  of  thirteen 
gladiatorial  slaves,  for  which  he  was  in  debt  nearly  half  a 
million  dollars.  If  the  bidding  was  not  prompt  enough  nor 
high  enough  to  suit  him,  he  would  rail  at  the  bidders  for  be- 
ing stingy,  and  demand  if  they  were  not  ashamed  to  be 
richer  than  he  was. 

He  levied  taxes  of  every  kind  that  he  could  invent,  and 
no  kind  of  property  or  person  was  exempt  from  some  sort  of 
taxation.  Much  complaint  was  made  that  the  law  for  im- 
posing this  taxation  had  never  been  published,  and  that 
much  grievance  was  caused  from  want  of  sufficient  knowl- 
edge of  the  law.  He  then  published  the  law,  but  had  it 
written  in  very  small  characters  and  posted  up  in  a  corner 
so  that  nobody  could  obtain  a  copy  of  it.  His  wife  Csesonia 
gave  birth  to  a  daughter,  upon  which  Caligula  complained 
of  his  poverty,  caused  by  the  burdens  to  which  he  was  sub- 
jected, not  only  as  an  emperor  but  as  a  father,  and  therefore 
made  a  general  collection  for  the  support  of  the  child,  and 
gave  public  notice  that  he  would  receive  New  Year's  gifts 
the  first  of  the  following  January.  At  the  appointed  time 
he  took  his  station  in  the  vestibule  of  his  palace,  and  the 
people  of  all  ranks  came  and  threw  to  him  their  presents 
k'by  the  handfuls  and  lapfuls.  At  last,  being  seized  with 
an  invincible  desire  of  feeling  money,  taking  off  his  slippers 
lie  repeatedly  walked  over  great .  heaps  of  gold  coin  spread 
upon  the  spacious  floor,  and  then  laying  himself  down, 
rolled  his  whole  body  in  gold  over  and  over  again."  — 
Suetonius.™ 

His  cruelty  was  as  deadly  as  his  lust  and  prodigality  were 
extravagant.  At  the  dedication  of  that  bridge  of  boats  which 
WM.,  chap.  xlii. 


CLAUDIUS. 


THE  DELIRIUM  OF  POWER.  97 

he  built,  he  spent  two  days  reveling  and  parading  over  the 
bridge.  Before  his  departure,  he  invited  a  number  of  people 
to  come  to  him  on  the  bridge,  all  of  whom  without  distinc- 
tion of  age,  or  sex,  or  rank,  or  character,  he  caused  to  be 
thrown  headlong  into  the  sea,  "  thrusting  down  with  poles 
and  oars  those  who,  to  save  themselves,  had  got  hold  of  the 
rudders  of  the  ship. "  At  one  time  when  meat  had  risen  to 
very  high  prices,  he  commanded  that  the  wild  beasts  that 
were  kept  for  the  arena,  should  be  fed  on  criminals,  who, 
without  distinction  as  to  degrees  of  crime,  were  given  to  be 
devoured. 

During  his  revels  he  would  cause  criminals,  and  even 
innocent  persons,  to  be  racked  and  beheaded.  He  seemed 
to  gloat  over  the  thought  that  the  lives  of  mankind  were  in 
his  bands,  and  that  at  a  word  he  could  do  what  he  would. 
Once  at  a  grand  entertainment,  at  which  both  the  consuls 
were  seated  next  to  him,  he  suddenly  burst  out  into  violent 
laughter,  and  when  the  consuls  asked  him  what  he  was 
laughing  about,  he  replied,  "Nothing,  but  that  upon  a  sin- 
gle word  of  mine  you  might  both  have  your  throats  cut." 
Often,  as  he  kissed  or  fondled  the  neck  of  his  wife  or  mis- 
tress, he  would  exclaim,  ' '  So  beautiful  a  throat  must  be  cut 
whenever  I  please." 

All  these  are  but  parts  of  his  ways,  but  the  rest  are 
either  too  indecent  or  too  horrible  to  relate.  '  At  last,  after 
indulging  more  than  three  years  of  his  savage  rage,  he  was 
killed  by  a  company  of  conspirators,  with  the  tribune  of  the 
praetorian  guards  at  their  head,  having  reigned  three  years, 
ten  months,  and  eight  days,  and  lived  twenty-nine  years. 
He  was  succeeded  by  — 

CLAUDIUS. 

The  soldiers  not  only  killed  an  emperor,  but  they  made 
another  one.  There  was  at  that  time,  living  in  the  palace, 
an  uncle  to  Caligula,  named  Claudius,  now  fifty  years  old. 
Though  he  seems  to  have  had  as  much  sense  as  any  of  them, 


98  TBE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

he  was  slighted  and  counted  as  a  fool  by  those  around  him. 
Even  his  mother,  when  she  would  remark  upon  any  one's 
dullness,  would  use  the  comparison,  "He  is  a  greater  fool 
than  my  son  Claudius."  About  the  palace  he  was  made  the 
butt  of  the  jests  and  practical  jokes  of  the  courtiers  and  even 
of  the  buffoons.  At  supper  he  would  cram  himself  full  of 
victuals,  and  drink  till  he  was  drunk  ;  and  then  go  to  sleep 
at  the  table.  At  this,  the  company  would  pelt  him  with 
olive  stones  or  scraps  of  victuals  ;  and  the  buffoons  would 
prod  him  with  a  cane,  or  snip  him  with  a  whip  to  wake  him. 
And  when  he  had  gone  to  sleep,  while  he  lay  snoring,  they 
would  put  slippers  on  his  hands,  that  when  he  should  wake 
and  attempt  to  rub  his  eyes  open,  he  would  rub  his  face  with 
the  slippers. 

The  night  that  Caligula  was  killed,  Claudius,  fearing  for 
his  own  life,  crept  into  a  balcony,  and  hid  himself  behind 
the  curtains  of  the  door.  The  soldiers,  rushing  through  the 
palace,  happened  to  see  his  feet  sticking  out,  and  one  of 
them  grabbed  him  by  the  heels  and  demanding  to  know 
who  owned  them,  dragged  forth  Claudius  ;  and  when  he 
discovered  who  he  was,  exclaimed,  "Why,  this  is  German- 
icus  ;  let 's  make  him  emperor  !  "  The  other  soldiers  in  the 
band  immediately  adopted  the  idea,  saluted  him  as  emperor, 
set  him  on  a  litter,  and  carried  him  on  their  shoulders  to  the 
camp  of  the  praetorian  guards.  The  next  day  while  the 
Senate  deliberated,  the  people  cried  out  that  they  would 
have  one  master,  and  that  he  should  be  Claudius.  The  sol- 
diers assembled  under  arms,  and  took  the  oath  of  allegiance 
to  him  ;  upon  which  he  promised  them  about  seven  hundred 
dollars  apiece. 

By  the  mildness  and  correctness  of  his  administration, 
he  soon  secured  the  favor  and  affection  of  the  whole  people. 
Having  once  gone  a  short  distance  out  of  the  city,  a  report 
was  spread  that  he  had  been  waylaid  and  killed.  "The 
people  never  ceased  cursing  the  soldiers  for  traitors,  and  the 
Senate  as  parricides,  until  one  or  two  persons,  and  presently 


CLAUDIUS  AND  HIS   WIVES.  09 

after  several  others,  were  brought  by  the  magistrates  upon 
the  rostra,  who  assured  them  that  he  was  alive,  and  not  far 
from  the  city,  on  his  way  home."  —  Suetonius.™ 

As  he  sat  to  judge  causes,  the  lawyers  would  openly  re- 
prove him  and  make  fun  of  him.  One  of  these  one  day, 
making  excuses  why  a  witness  did  not  appear,  stated  that  it 
was  impossible  for  him  to  appear,  but  did  not  tell  why. 
Claudius  insisted  upon  knowing,  and  after  several  questions 
had  been  evaded,  the  statement  was  brought  forth  that  the 
man  was  dead,  upon  which  Claudius  replied,  "  I  think  that 
is  a  sufficient  excuse."  When  he  would  start  away  from  the 
tribunal,  they  would  call  him  back.  If  he  insisted  upon 
going,  they  would  seize  hold  of  his  dress  or  take  him  by  the 
heels,  and  make  him  stay  until  they  were  ready  for  him  to 
go.  A  Greek  once  having  a  case  before  him,  got  into  a 
dispute  with  him,  and  called  out  loud,  "You  are  an  old 
fool ; "  and  a  Roman  knight  once  being  prosecuted  upon  a 
false  charge,  being  provoked  at  the  character  of  the  wit- 
nesses brought  against  him,  upbraided  Claudius  with  folly 
and  cruelty,  and  threw  some  books  and  a  writing  pencil  in 
his  face.  He  pleased  the  populace  with  distributions  of 
grain  and  money,  and  displays  of  magnificent  games  and 
spectacles. 

This  is  the  Claudius  mentioned  in  Acts  xviii,  2,  who  com- 
manded all  Jews  to  depart  from  Rome.  This  he  did,  says 
Suetonius,  because  they  "were  continually  making  dis- 
turbances at  the  instigation  of  one  Chrestus."  These  dis- 
turbances arose  from  contentions  of  the  Jews  against  the 
Christians  about  Christ.  As  the  Christians  were  not  yet 
distinguished  from  the  Jews,  the  decree  of  banishment  like- 
wise made  no  distinction,  and  when  he  commanded  all  Jews 
to  depart  from  Rome,  Christians  were  among  them.  One 
of  his  principal  favorites  was  that  Felix,  governor  of  Judea, 
mentioned  in  Acts  xxiii,  24,  before  whom  Paul  pleaded,  and 
who  trembled  as  the  apostle  "reasoned  of  righteousness, 
temperance,  and  judgment  to  come." 

23  "Lives  of  the  Caesars,"  Claudius,  chap.  xil. 


100  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

Claudius  was  not  as  bad  as  either  Tiberius  or  Caligula, 
but  what  he  himself  lacked  in  this  respect  was  amply  made 
up  by  his  wives.  "In  his  marriage,  as  in  all  else,  Claudius 
had  been  pre-eminent  in  misfortune.  He  lived  in  an  age  of 
which  the  most  frightful  sign  of  depravity  was  that  its  women 
were,  if  possible,  a  shade  worse  than  its  men,  and  it  was  the 
misery  of  Claudius,  as  it  finally  proved  his  ruin,  to  have 
been  united  by  marriage  to  the  very  worst  among  them  all. 
Princesses  like  the  Bernice,  and  the  Drusilla,  and  the 
Salome,  and  the  Herodias  of  the  sacred  historians,  were  in 
this  age  a  familiar  spectacle  ;  but  none  of  them  were  so 
wicked  as  two  at  least  of  Claudius's  wives.  He  was  be- 
trothed or  married  no  less  than  five  times.  The  lady  first 
destined  for  his  bride  had  been  repudiated  because  her  par- 
ents had  offended  Augustus  ;  the  next  died  on  the  very  day 
intended  for  her  nuptials.  By  his  first  actual  wife,  Urgula- 
nia,  whom  he  had  married  in  early  youth,  he  had  two  chil- 
dren, Drusus  and  Claudia  ;  Drusus  was  accidentally  choked 
in  boyhood  while  trying  to  swallow  a  pear  which  had  been 
thrown  up  into  the  air.  Very  shortly  after  the  birth  of 
Claudia,  discovering  the  unfaithfulness  of  Urgulania,  Clau- 
dius divorced  her,  and  ordered  the  child  to  be  stripped  naked 
and  exposed  to  die.  His  second  wife,  ./Elia  Petina,  seems 
to  have  been  an  unsuitable  person,  and  her  also  he  divorced. 
His  third  and  fourth  wives  lived  to  earn  a  colossal  infamy  — 
Yaleria  Messalina  for  her  shameless  character,  Agrippina 
the  younger  for  her  unscrupulous  ambition. 

"Messalina,  when  she  married,  could  scarcely  have  been 
fifteen  years  old,  yet  she  at  once  assumed  a  dominant  posi- 
tion, and  secured  it  by  means  of  the  most  unblushing 
wickedness.  But  she  did  not  reign  so  absolutely  undis- 
turbed as  to  be  without  her  own  jealousies  and  apprehen- 
sions ;  and  these  were  mainly  kindled  by  Julia  and  Agrip- 
pina, the  two  nieces  of  the  emperor.  They  were,  no  less 
than  herself,  beautiful,  brilliant,  and  evil-hearted  women, 
quite  ready  to  make  their  own  coteries,  and  to  dispute,  as 


MESSALINA'S  DEPRAVITY.  101 

far  as  they  dared,  the  supremacy  of  a  bold  but  reckless  rival. 
They,  too,  used  their  arts,  their  wealth,  their  rank,  their 
political  influence,  their  personal  fascinations,  to  secure  for 
themselves  a  band  of  adherents,  ready,  when  the  proper 
moment  arrived,  for  any  conspiracy.  .  .  . 

"  The  life  of  this  beautiful  princess,  short  as  it  was,— 
for  she  died  at  a  very  early  age, —  was  enough  to  make  her 
name  a  proverb  of  everlasting  infamy.  For  a  time  she 
appeared  irresistible.  Her  personal  fascination  had  won 
for  her  an  unlimited  sway  over  the  facile  mind  of  Claudius, 
and  she  had  either  won  over  by  her  intrigues,  or  terrified 
by  her  pitiless  severity,  the  noblest  of  the  Romans  and  the 
most  powerful  of  the  freedmen." — Farrar.zi 

She  became  "  so  vehemently  enamoured  of  Caius  Silius, 
the  handsomest  of  the  Roman  youth,  that  she  obliged  him 
to  divorce  his  wife,  Julia  Silana,  a  lady  of  high  quality," 
that  she  might  have  him  to  herself.  ' '  Nor  was  Silius  blind 
to  the  danger  and  malignity  of  his  crime  ;  but,  as  it  was 
certain  destruction  to  decline  her  suit,  and  there  were  some 
hopes  of  beguiling  Claudius,  while  great  rewards  were  held 
out  to  him,  he  was  content  to  take  the  chance  of  what  might 
happen  thereafter,  and  enjoy  the  present  advantages.  The 
empress  proceeded  not  stealthily,  but  went  to  his  house  fre- 
quently, with  a  numerous  train,  accompanied  him  incessantly 
abroad,  loaded  him  with  presents  and  honors;  and  at -last, 
as  if  the  fortune  of  the  empire  had  been  transferred  with  the 
emperor's  wife,  at  the  house  of  her  adulterer  were  now  seen 
the  slaves,  freedmen,  and  equipage  of  the  prince." — Tacitus.** 

Claudius  made  a  journey  to  Ostia,  and  while  he  was 
gone,  Messalina  publicly  celebrated  her  marriage  with  Silius, 
with  royal  ceremony.  ' '  I  am  aware  that  it  will  appear 
fabulous  that  any  human  beings  should  have  exhibited  such 
recklessness  of  consequences  ;  and  that,  in  a  city  where 
everything  was  known  and  talked  of,  any  one,  much  more  a 

24  "Seekers  after  God,"  chap,  vi,  par.  10-12;  and  chap.  Ix,  par.  2. 
25  "  Annals,"  book  xi,  chap.  xli. 


102  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

consul  elect,  should  have  met  the  emperor's  wife,  on  a  stated 
day,  in  the  presence  of  persons  called  in,  to  seal  the  deeds, 
as  for  the  purpose  of  procreation,  and  that  she  should  have 
heard  the  words  of  the  augurs,  entered  the  house  of  the  hus- 
band, sacrificed  to  the  gods,  sat  down  among  the  guests  at 
the  nuptial  banquet,  exchanged  kisses  and  embraces,  and  in 
fine  passed  the  night  in  unrestrained  conjugal  intercourse. 
But  I  would  not  dress  up  my  narrative  with  fictions  to  give 
it  an  air  of  marvel,  rather  than  relate  what  has  been  stated 
to  me  or  written  by  my  seniors." — Tacitus.™ 

The  report  of  all  this  was  carried  to  Claudius,  which  so 
terrified  him  that  but  for  his  favorites,  he  would  undoubtedly 
nave  surrendered  the  empire  to  Silius.  Several  of  these, 
however,  rallied  him  with  the  assurance  that  they  would 
stand  by  him  and  help  him  through,  and  they  persuaded  him 
to  start  for  Rome  ;  but  fearing  that  even  then,  if  Messalina 
should  meet  him,  she  would  persuade  him  to  pardon  her, 
they  took  him  in  the  same  carriage  with  themselves,  and  all 
the  way  as  they  went,  one  of  them  kept  continually  exclaim- 
ing, "O  the  villainy,  O  the  treason!"  As  for  Messalina, 
"she  never  wallowed  in  greater  voluptuousness  ;  it  was  then 
the  middle  of  autumn,  and  in  her  house  she  exhibited  a  rep- 
resentation of  the  vintage  :  the  winepresses  were  plied,  the 
wine  vats  flowed,  and  round  them  danced  women  begirt  with 
skins  like  Bacchanalians  at  their  sacrifices,  or  under  the 
maddening  inspiration  of  their  deity  :  she  herself,  with  her 
hair  loose  and  flowing,  waved  a  thyrsus  ;  by  her  side  Silius, 
crowned  with  ivy,  and  wearing  buskins,  tossed  his  head 
about ;  while  around  them  danced  the  wanton  choir  in  ob- 
streperous revelry.  It  is  reported  that  Yectius  Valens, 
having  in  a  frolic  climbed  to  an  exceeding  high  tree,  when 
asked  what  he  saw,  answered,  '  a  terrible  storm  from  Ostia. ' ' 
— Tacitus. Z1 

That    storm,  was   coming   swiftly,    and   when   it   came, 
Messalina  was  given  the  privilege  of  killing  herself.     She 

z'/d,  chap,  xxvii.  27  Id.,  chap.  xxxi. 


AGRIPPINA    THE    TIGRESS.  103 

plied  the  dagger  twice  but  failed,  and  then  a  tribune  ran  her 
through  with  his  sword.  Word  was  carried  to  Claudius 
while  he  was  sitting  at  a  feast,  that  Messalina  was  no  more, 
to  which  he  made  neither  reply  nor  inquiry,  "  but  called  for 
a  cup  of  wine  and  proceeded  in  the  usual  ceremonies  of  the 
feast,  nor  did  he,  indeed,  during  the  following  days,  mani- 
fest any  symptom  of  disgust  or  joy,  of  resentment  or  sorrow, 
nor,  in  short,  of  any  human  affection  ;  not  when  he  beheld 
the  accusers  of  his  wife  exulting  at  her  death  ;  not  when  he 
looked  upon  her  mourning  children."  —  Tacitus™ 

Messalina  was  dead  ;  but  bad  as  she  had  been,  a  worse 
woman  took  her  place.  This  was  Agrippina,  sister  of 
Caligula,  niece  of  Claudius,  and  the  mother  of  Nero. 
"Whatever  there  was  of  possible  affection  in  the  tigress 
nature  of  Agrippina  was  now  absorbed  in  the  person  of  her 
child.  For  that  child,  from  its  cradle  to  her  own  death  by 
his  means,  she  toiled  and  sinned.  The  fury  of  her  own 
ambition,  inextricably  linked  with  the  uncontrollable  fierce- 
ness of  her  love  for  this  only  son,  henceforth  directed  every 
action  of  her  life.  Destiny  had  made  her  the  sister  of  one 
emperor  ;  intrigue  elevated  her  into  the  wife  of  another  : 
her  own  crimes  made  her  the  mother  of  a  third.  And  at 
first  sight  her  career  might  have  seemed  unusually  success- 
ful  ;  for  while  still  in  the  prime  of  life  she  was  wielding, 
first  in  the  name  of  her  husband,  and  then  in  that  of  her 
son,  no  mean  share  in  the  absolute  government  of  the 
Roman  world.  But  meanwhile  that  same  unerring  retribu- 
tion, whose  stealthy  footsteps  in  the  rear  of  the  triumphant 
criminal  we  can  track  through  page  after  page  of  history, 
was  stealing  nearer  and  nearer  to  her  with  uplifted  hand. 
When  she  had  reached  the  dizzy  pinnacle  of  gratified  love 
and  pride  to  which  she  had  waded  through  so  many  a  deed 
of  sin  and  blood,  she  was  struck  down  into  terrible  ruin  and 
violent,  shameful  death  by  the  hand  of  that  very  son  for 
whose  sake  she  had  so  often  violated  the  laws  of  virtue  and 

48  Id.,  chap,  xxxviii. 


104  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

integrity,  and  spurned  so  often  the  pure  and  tender  obliga- 
tion which  even  the  heathen  had  been  taught  by  the  voice 
of  God  within  their  conscience  to  recognize  and  to  adore. 

"Intending  that  her  son  should  marry  Octavia,  the 
daughter  of  Claudius,  her  first  step  was  to  drive  to  death 
Silanus,  a  young  nobleman  to  whom  Octavia  had  already 
been  betrothed.  Her  next  care  was  to  get  rid  of  all  rivals 
possible  or  actual.  Among  the  former  were  the  beautiful 
Calpurnia  and  her  own  sister-in-law,  Domitia  Lepida. 
Among  the  latter  was  the  wealthy  Lollia  Paulina,  against 
whom  she  trumped  up  an  accusation  of  sorcery  and  treason, 
upon  which  her  wealth  was  confiscated,  but  her  life  spared 
by  the  emperor,  who  banished  her  from  Italy.  This  half 
vengeance  was  not  enough  for  the  mother  of  Nero.  Like 
the  daughter  of  Herodias  in  sacred  history,  she  dispatched  a 
tribune  with  orders  to  bring  her  the  head  of  her  enemy  ; 
and  when  it  was  brought  to  her,  and  she  found  a  difficulty 
in  recognizing  those  withered  and  ghastly  features  of  a  once 
celebrated  beauty,  she  is  said  with  her  own  hand  to  have 
lifted  one  of  the  lips,  and  to  have  satisfied  herself  that  this 
was  indeed  the  head  of  Lollia.  .  .  .  Well  may  Adolf  Stahr 
observe  that  Shakespeare's  Lady  Macbeth  and  husband- 
murdering  Gertrude  are  mere  children  by  the  side  of  this 
awful  giant-shape  of  steely  feminine  cruelty."  —Farrar.™ 

By  the  horrible  crimes  and  fearful  sinning  of  Agrippina, 
Nero  became  emperor  of  Rome,  A.  D.  57,  at  the  age  of 
seventeen.  As  in  the  account  already  given,  there  is  enough 
to  show  what  the  Roman  monarchy  really  was  ;  and  as  that 
is  the  purpose  of  this  chapter,  it  is  not  necessary  any  further 
to  portray  the  frightful  enormities  of  individual  emperors. 
It  is  sufficient  to  say  of  Nero,  that,  in  degrading  vices, 
shameful  licentiousness,  and  horrid  cruelty,  he  transcended 
all  who  had  been  before  him. 

It  is  evident  that  for  the  production  of  such  men  as 
Antony  and  Augustus,  Tiberius  and  Caligula,  Claudius  and 
Nero,  with  such  women  as  their  mothers  and  wives — to  say 
89 "  Seekers  after  God,"  chap,  x,  par.  5. 


ROMAN  SOCIETY  IN  GENERAL.  105 

nothing  of  Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius,  and  Domitian,  who 
quickly  followed  —  in  direct  succession  and  in  so  short  a 
time,  there  must  of  necessity  have  been  a  condition  of  so- 
ciety in  general  which  corresponded  to  the  nature  of  the 
product.  Such  was  in  fact  the  case. 

"An  evil  day  is  approaching  when  it  becomes  recognized 
in  a  community  that  the  only  standard  of  social  distinction 
is  wealth.  That  day  was  soon  followed  in  Rome  by  its 
unavoidable  consequence,  a  government  founded  upon  two 
domestic  elements,  corruption  and  terrorism.  No  language 
can  describe  the  state  of  that  capital  after  the  civil  wars. 
The  accumulation  of  power  and  wealth  gave  rise  to  a  uni- 
versal depravity.  Law  ceased  to  be  of  any  value.  A  suitor 
must  deposit  a  bribe  before  a  trial  could  be  had.  The  social 
fabric  was  a  festering  mass  of  rottenness.  The  people  had 
become  a  populace  ;  the  aristocracy  was  demoniac  ;  the  city 
was  a  hell.  No  crime  that  the  annals  of  human  wickedness 
can  show  was  left  unperpetrated  ;  —  remorseless  murders  ; 
the  betrayal  of  parents,  husbands,  wives,  friends  ;  poisoning 
reduced  to  a  system  ;  adultery  degenerating  into  incests  and 
crimes  that  cannot  be  written. 

"Women  of  the  higher  class  were  so  lascivious,  depraved, 
and  dangerous,  that  men  could  not  be  compelled  to  contract 
matrimony  with  them  ;  marriage  was  displaced  by  concubin- 
age ;  even  virgins  were  guilty  of  inconceivable  immodesties  ; 
great  officers  of  state  arid  ladies  of  the  court,  of  promiscuous 
bathings  and  naked  exhibitions.  In  the  time  of  Caesar  it 
had  become  necessary  for  the  government  to  interfere  and 
actually  put  a  premium  on  marriage.  He  gave  rewards  to 
women  who  had  many  children  ;  prohibited  those  who  were 
under  forty-five  years  of  age,  and  who  had  no  children,  from 
wearing  jewels  and  riding  in  litters,  hoping  by  such  social 
disabilities  to  correct  the  evil.  It  went  on  from  bad  to 
worse,  so  that  Augustus,  in  view  of  the  general  avoidance  of 
legal  marriage  and  resort  to  concubinage  with  slaves,  was 
compelled  to  impose  penalties  on  the  unmarried  —  to  enact 
10 


106  THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 

that  they  should  not  inherit  by  will  except  from  relations. 
Not  that  the  Roman  women  refrained  from  the  gratification 
of  their  desires ;  their  depravity  impelled  them  to  such 
wicked  practices  as  cannot  be  named  in  a  modern  book. 
They  actually  reckoned  the  years,  not  by  the  consuls,  but  by 
the  men  they  had  lived  with.  To  be  childless  and  therefore 
without  the  natural  restraint  of  a  family,  was  looked  upon  as 
a  singular  felicity.  Plutarch  correctly  touched  the  point 
when  he  said  that  the  Romans  married  to  be  heirs  and  not 
to  have  heirs. 

"  Of  offenses  that  do  not  rise  to  the  dignity  of  atrocity, 
but  which  excite  our  loathing,  such  as  gluttony  and  the  most 
debauched  luxury,  the  annals  of  the  times  furnish  disgusting 
proofs.  It  was  said,  '  They  eat  that  they  may  vomit,  and 
vomit  that  they  may  eat.'  At  the  taking  of  Perusium,  three 
hundred  of  the  most  distinguished  citizens  were  solemnly 
sacrificed  at  the  altar  of  Divius  Julius  by  Octavian.  Are 
these  the  deeds  of  civilized  men,  or  the  riotings  of  cannibals 
drunk  with  blood  ? 

"The  higher  classes  on  all  sides  exhibited  a  total  extinc- 
tion of  moral  principle  ;  the  lower  were  practical  atheists. 
Who  can  peruse  the  annals  of  the  emperors  without  being 
shocked  at  the  manner  in  which  men  died,  meeting  their  fate 
with  the  obtuse  tranquillity  that  characterizes  beasts?  A 
centurion  with  a  private  mandate  appears,  and  forthwith  the 
victim  opens  his  veins,  and  dies  in  a  warm  bath.  At  the 
best,  all  that  was  done  was  to  strike  at  the  tyrant.  Men  de- 
spairingly acknowledged  that  the  system  itself  was  utterly 
past  cure. 

"That  in  these  statements  I  do  not  exaggerate,  hear 
what  Tacitus  says  :  '  The  holy  ceremonies  of  religion  were 
violated  ;  adultery  reigning  without  control  ;  the  adjacent 
islands  filled  with  exiles  ;  rocks  and  desert  places  stained 
with  clandestine  murders,  and  Rome  itself  a  theater  of  hor- 
rors, where  nobility  of  descent  and  splendor  of  fortune 


ULTIMATE  PAGANISM.  107 

marked  men  out  for  destruction ;  where  the  vigor  of  mind 
that  aimed  at  civil  dignities,  and  the  modesty  that  declined 
them,  were  offenses  without  distinction  ;  where  virtue  was  a 
crime  that  led  to  certain  ruin  ;  where  the  guilt  of  informers 
and  the  wages  of  their  iniquity  were  alike  detestable  ;  where 
the  sacerdotal  order,  the  consular  dignity,  the  government  of 
provinces,  and  even  the  cabinet  of  the  prince,  were  seized  by 
that  execrable  race  as  their  lawful  prey  ;  where  nothing  was 
sacred,  nothing  safe  from  the  hand  of  rapacity  ;  where  slaves 
were  suborned,  or  by  their  own  malevolence  excited  against 
their  masters  ;  where  freemen  betrayed  their  patrons,  and  he 
who  had  lived  without  an  enemy  died  by  the  treachery  of  a 
friend. ' '  —  Draper . 30 

To  complete  this  dreadful  picture  requires  but  the  touch 
of  Inspiration.  "Professing  themselves  to  be  wise,  they 
became  fools  ;  and  changed  the  glory  of  the  uncorruptible 
God  into  an  image  made  like  to  corruptible  man,  and  to 
birds,  and  four-footed  beasts,  and  creeping  things.  Where- 
fore God  also  gave  them  up  to  uncleanness,  through  the 
lusts  of  their  own  hearts,  to  dishonor  their  own  bodies  be- 
tween themselves  :  who  changed  the  truth  of  God  into  a  lie, 
and  worshiped  and  served  the  creature  more  than  the  Crea- 
tor, who  is  blessed  forever.  Amen.  For  this  cause  God 
gave  them  up  unto  vile  affections.  For  even  their  women 
did  change  the  natural  use  into  that  which  is  against  nature  : 
and  likewise  also  the  men,  leaving  the  natural  use  of  the 
woman,  burned  in  their  lust  one  toward  another  ;  men  with 
men  working  that  which  is  unseemly,  and  receiving  in  them- 
selves that  recompense  of  their  error  which  was  meet.  And 
even  as  they  did  not  like  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge, 
God  gave  them  over  to  a  reprobate  mind,  to  do  those  things 
which  are  not  convenient  :  being  filled  with  all  unrighteous- 
ness, fornication,  wickedness,  covetousness,  maliciousness  ; 
full  of  envy,  murder,  debate,  deceit,  malignity,  whisperers, 
backbiters,  haters  of  God,  despiteful,  proud,  boasters,  in- 

80  "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  chap,  viii,  par.  22-24. 


108 


THE  ROMAN  MONARCHY. 


ventors  of  evil  things,  disobedient  to  parents,  without  un- 
derstanding, covenant-breakers,  without  natural  affection, 
implacable,  unmerciful  :  who,  knowing  the  judgment  of 
God,  that  they  which  commit  such  things  are  worthy  of 
death  ;  not  only  do  the  same,  but  have  pleasure  in  them 
that  do  them."31 

When  this  scripture  was  read  by  the  Christians  in  Rome, 
they  knew  from  daily  observation  that  it  was  but  a  faithful 
description  of  Roman  society  as  it  was.  And  Roman  society 
as  it  was,  was  but  the  resultant  of  pagan  civilization,  and 
the  logic,  in  its  last  analysis,  of  the  pagan  religion.  Roman 
society  as  it  was,  was  ULTIMATE  PAGANISM. 

31  Rom.  i,  22-32. 


AGRIPPINA. 
CLAUDIUS. 


LI  VI  A. 

TIBERIUS. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE  "TEN    PERSECUTIONS." 

which  Rome  was  in   its  supreme  place,  the  other 
1    cities  of   the  empire, —  Alexandria,  Antioch,   Ephesus, 
Corinth,   etc. —  were  in  their  narrower  spheres;  for  it  was 
the  licentiousness  of  Greece  and  the  East  which  had  given 
to  the  corruption  of  Rome  a  deeper  dye. 

Into  that  world  of  iniquity,  Jesus  Christ  sent,  as  sheep 
among  wolves,  a  little  band  of  disciples  carrying  hope  to  the 
despairing,  joy  to  the  sorrowing,  comfort  to  the  afflicted, 
relief  to  the  distressed,  peace  to  the  perplexed,  and  to  all  a 
message  of  merciful  forgiveness  of  sins,  of  the  gift  of  the 
righteousness  of  God,  and  of  a  purity  and  power  which 
would  cleanse  the  soul  from  all  unrighteousness  of  heart  and 
life,  and  plant  there  instead  the  perfect  purity  of  the  life  of 
the  Son  of  God  and  the  courage  of  an  everlasting  joy.  This 
gospel  of  peace  and  of  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation 
they  were  commanded  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach 
to  every  creature. 

The  disciples  went  everywhere  preaching  the  word,  and 
before  the  death  of  men  who  were  then  in  the  prime  of 
life  this  good  news  of  the  grace  of  God  had  actually  been 
preached  in  all  the  then  known  world.  Rom.  i,  8  and 
x,  18  ;  Col.  i,  6,  23.  And  by  it  many  were  brought  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  peace  and  power  of  God,  revealed 
in  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  "In  every  congregation 
there  were  prayers  to  God  that  he  would  listen  to  the 
sighing  of  the  prisoner  and  captive,  and  have  mercy  on 

[109] 


HO  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

those  who  were  ready  to  die.  For  the  slave  and  his  master 
there  was  one  law  and  one  hope,  one  baptism,  one  Saviour, 
one  Judge.  In  times  of  domestic  bereavement  the  Christian 
slave  doubtless  often  consoled  his  pagan  mistress  with  the 
suggestion  that  our  present  separations  are  only  for  a  little 
while,  and  revealed  to  her  willing  ear  that  there  is  another 
world  —  a  land  in  which  we  rejoin  our  dead.  How  is  it 
possible  to  arrest  the  spread  of  a  faith  which  can  make  the 
broken  heart  leap  with  joy?  " — Draper.1 

Yet  to  arrest  the  spread  of  that  faith  there  were  many 
long,  earnest,  and  persistent  efforts  by  the  Roman  empire. 
Before  entering,  however,  upon  the  examination  of  this  sub- 
ject as  it  is,  it  is  necessary  to  notice  a  point  that  has  been 
much  misunderstood  or  else  much  misrepresented  ;  that  is 
the  imperial  or  ''Ten  Persecutions." 

In  the  Church  and  State  scheme  of  the  fourth  century, 
the  theory  of  the  bishops  was  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was 
come;  and  to  maintain  the  theory  it  became  necessary  to 
pervert  the  meaning  of  both  Scripture  history  and  Scripture 
prophecy.  Accordingly,  as  the  antitype  of  the  ten  plagues 
of  Egypt,  and  as  the  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy  of  the  ten 
horns  which  made  war  with  the  Lamb  (Rev.  xvii,  12-14), 
there  was  invented  the  theory  of  ten  persecutions  of  the 
Christians  inflicted  by  the  ten  emperors,  Nero,  Domitian, 
Trajan,  Marcus  Aurelius,  Septimius  Severus,  Maximin, 
Decius,  Yalerian,  Aurelian,  and  Diocletian.  Some  of  these 
persecuted  the  Christians,  as  Nero,  Marcus  Aurelius,  De- 
cius, and  Diocletian  ;  others  were  as  gentle  toward  the 
Christians  as  toward  anybody  else  ;  and  yet  others  not 
named  in  the  list,  persecuted  everybody  but  the  Christians. 
The  truth  is  that  so  far  as  the  emperors  were  concerned, 
taken  one  with  another,  from  Nero  to  Diocletian,  the  Chris- 
tians fared  as  well  as  anybody  else. 

In  this  discussion  and  in  the  study  of  this  subject  every- 
where, it  must  ever  be  borne  in  mind  that  Christianity  was 
wholly  outlawed  in  the  Roman  empire,  and  that  every  one 

1 "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  chap,  ix,  par.  8. 


ROMAN  LAW  AND   THE  JEW8.  m 

who  professed  it  became  by  the  very  fact  of  his  profession 
an  outlaw  —  an  enemy  to  the  emperor  and  people  of  Rome, 
and  guilty  of  high  treason. 

So  long  as  the  Christians  were  confounded  with  the 
Jews,  no  persecution  befell  them  from  the  .Roman  State, 
because  the  Roman  empire  had  recognized  the  Jewish  relig- 
ion as  lawful ;  consequently  when  the  Emperor  Claudius 
commanded  all  Jews  to  depart  from  Rome,  Christians  were 
included  among  them,  as  for  instance  Aquila  and  Priscilla. 
Acts  xviii,  1,  2.  And  when  in  Corinth,  under  Gallic  the 
Roman  governor  of  the  province  of  Achaia,  the  Jews  made 
insurrection  against  Paul  upon  the  charge  that  "this  fellow 
persuadeth  men  to  worship  God  contrary  to  the  law,"  Gal- 
lio  replied  :  "  If  it  were  a  matter  of  wrong  or  wicked  lewd- 
ness,  O  ye  Jews,  reason  would  that  I  should  bear  with  you  : 
but  if  it  be  a  question  of  words  and  names,  and  of  your  law, 
look  ye  to  it ;  for  I  will  be  no  judge  of  such  matters."  And 
with  this,  "he  drave  them  from  the  judgment  seat."  Acts 
xviii,  12-16.  Also  when  the  centurion  Lysias  had  rescued 
Paul  from  the  murderous  Jews  in  Jerusalem,  and  would 
send  him  for  protection  to  Felix  the  governor,  he  wrote  to 
Felix  th  us  :  "When  I  would  have  known  the  cause  where- 
fore they  accused  him,  I  brought  him  forth  into  their  council : 
whom  I  perceived  to  be  accused  of  questions  of  their  law, 
but  to  have  nothing  laid  to  his  charge  worthy  of  death  or  of 
bonds."  Chap,  xxiii,  28,  29. 

To  please  the  Jews,  Felix  left  Paul  in  prison.  When 
Festus  came  in  and  had  given  him  a  hearing,  and  would 
bring  his  case  before  King  Agrippa,  he  spoke  thus  of  the 
matter:  "There  is  a  certain  man  left  in  bonds  by  Felix: 
about  whom,  when  I  was  at  Jerusalem,  the  chief  priests 
and  the  elders  of  the  Jews  informed  me,  desiring  to  have 
judgment  against  him.  To  whom  I  answered,  It  is  not  the 
manner  of  the  Romans  to  deliver  any  man  to  die,  before 
that  he  which  is  accused  have  the  accusers  face  to  face,  and 
have  license  to  answer  for  himself  concerning  the  crime  laid 


112  THE   "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

against  him.  Therefore,  when  they  were  come  hither  with- 
out any  delay  on  the  morrow,  I  sat  on  the  judgment  seat, 
and  commanded  the  man  to  be  brought  forth.  Against  whom, 
when  the  accusers  stood  up,  they  brought  none  accusation 
of  such  things  as  I  supposed  :  but  had  certain  questions 
against  him  of  their  own  superstition,  and  of  one  Jesus, 
which  was  dead,  whom  Paul  affirmed  to  be  alive.  And 
because  I  doubted  of  such  manner  of  questions,  I  asked  him 
whether  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem,  and  there  be  judged  of 
these  matters.  But  when  Paul  had  appealed  to  be  reserved 
unto  the  hearing  of  Augustus,  I  commanded  him  to  be  kept 
till  I  might  send  him  to  Csesar."  And  when  Agrippa  had 
heard  him,  the  unanimous  decision  was,  "This  man  doeth 
nothing  worthy  of  death  or  of  bonds,"  and  Agrippa  declared, 
"This  man  might  have  been  set  at  liberty,  if  he  had  not 
appealed  unto  Caesar."  Acts  xxv,  14—21  ;  xxvi,  31,  32. 

And  even  when  he  had  been  heard  twice  by  Caesar — Nero 
—  as  it  was  still  but  a  controversy  between  Jews  concern- 
ing questions  of  their  own,  the  Roman  power  refused  to  take 
cognizance  of  the  case,  and  Paul,  a  Christian,  was  released. 
But  when  Christianity  had  spread  among  the  Gentiles  and 
a  clear  distinction  was  made  and  recognized  between 'the 
Christians  and  the  Jews,  by  all  parties,  and  Christianity  ap- 
peared as  a  new  religion  not  recognized  by  the  Roman  law, 
then  came  the  persecution  of  Christians  by  the  Horn  an  State. 

The  first  persecution  of  the  Christians  was  that  which 
was  inflicted  by  — 

NERO, 

in  A.  D.  64,  although  it  was  only  the  horrid  cruelty  in- 
flicted that  made  his  punishment  of  the  Christians  conspicu- 
ous above  that  of  many  others  upon  whom  the  rage  of  that 
tyrant  fell.  For,  "Except  that  his  murders  were  commonly 
prompted  by  need  or  fear,  arid  therefore  fell  oftenest  on  the 
rich  and  powerful,  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  one  class  suf- 
fered from  them  more  terribly  than  another.  His  family, 
his  friends,  the  senators,  the  knights,  philosophers  and 


THE  PERSECUTION  BY  NERO.  H3 

Christians,  Romans  and  provincials,  were  all  decimated  by 
them. " — Merivale* 

July  19,  A.  D.  64,  the  tenth  year  of  Nero's  reign,  a  fire 
broke  out  in  the  city  of  Rome,  which  raged  unchecked  for 
six  days.  The  stricken  people  had  barely  begun  to  collect 
their  thoughts  after  the  fire  had  subsided,  when  flames  burst 
out  a  second  time,  in  another  quarter  of  the  city,  and  raged 
for  three  days.  Taken  together,  the  two  conflagrations 
destroyed  nearly  the  whole  of  the  city.  Of  the  fourteen 
districts  into  which  the  city  was  divided,  only  four  re- 
mained uninjured.  Nero  was  universally  hated  for  his  des- 
perate tyranny.  A  rumor  was  soon  spread  and  readily 
believed,  that  while  the  city  was  burning,  he  stood  watching 
it,  and  chanting  the  "Sack  of  Troy"  to  an  accompaniment 
which  he  played  upon  his  lyre.  From  this  the  rumor  grew 
into  a  report,  and  it  was  also  believed,  that  Nero  himself  had 
ordered  the  fires  to  be  kindled.  It  \^is  further  insinuated 
that  his  object  in  burning  the  city  was  to  build  it  anew  upon 
a  much  more  magnificent  scale,  and  bestow  upon  it  his  own 
name. 

Whether  any  of  these  rumors  or  suspicions  were  cer- 
tainly true,  cannot  be  positively  stated  ;  but  whether  true  or 
not,  they  were  certainly  believed,  and  the  hatred  of  the 
people  was  intensified  to  such  fierceness  that  Nero  soon 
discovered  that  the  ruin  of  the  city  was  universally  laid  to 
his  charge.  He  endeavored  tp  allay  the  rising  storm  :  he 
provided  shelter,  and  supplied  other  urgent  necessaries  for 
the  multitude.  Vows  and  great  numbers  of  burnt  offerings 
to  the  gods  were  made,  but  all  to  no  purpose.  The  signs  of 
public  dissatisfaction  only  became  more  significant.  It  be- 
came essential  that  the  emperor  should  turn  their  suspicion 
from  him,  or  forfeit  the  throne  and  his  life.  The  crisis  was 
a  desperate  one,  and  desperately  did  he  meet  it.  There  was 
a  little  band  of  Christians  known  in  the  city.  They  were 
already  hated  by  the  populace.  These  were  accused,  con- 
demned, and  tortured  as  the  destroyers  of  the  city.  Tacitus 

2  "Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap.  Iv,  par.  6. 


114  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

tells  of  the  fate  of  those  to  whom  he  says  "the  vulgar  gave 
the  name  of  Christians  "  :  — 

"He  [Nero]  inflicted  the  most  exquisite  tortures  on  those  men  who, 
under  the  vulgar  appellation  of  Christians,  were  already  branded  with 
deserved  infamy.  They  derived  their  name  and  origin  from  Christ,  who 
in  the  reign  of  Tiberius  had  suffered  death  by  the  sentence  of  the  proc- 
urator, Pontius  Pilate.  For  awhile  this  dire  superstition  was  checked  ; 
but  it  again  burst  forth  ;  and  not  only  spread  itself  over  Judea,  the  first 
seat  of  this  mischievous  sect,  but  was  even  introduced  into  Rome,  the 
common  asylum  which  receives  and  protects  whatever  is  impure,  what- 
ever is  atrocious.  The  confessions  of  those  who  were  seized,  discovered 
a  great  multitude  of  their  accomplices,  and  they  were  all  convicted,  not 
so  much  for  the  crime  of  setting  fire  to  the  city,  as  for  their  hatred  of 
human  kind.  They  died  in  torments,  and  their  torments  were  embittered 
by  insult  and  derision.  Some  were  nailed  on  crosses  ;  others  sewn  in 
the  skins  of  wild  beasts,  and  exposed  to  the  fury  of  dogs  ;  others  again, 
smeared  over  with  combustible  materials,  were  used  as  torches  to  illu- 
minate the  darkness  of  the  night.  The  gardens  of  Nero  were  destined 
for  the  melancholy  spectacle,  which  was  accompanied  with  a  horse  race, 
and  honored  with  the  presence  of  the  emperor,  who  mingled  with  the 
populace  in  the  dress  and  attitude  of  a  charioteer.  The  guilt  of  the 
Christians  deserved  indeed  the  most  exemplary  punishment,  but  the 
public  abhorrence  was  changed  into  commiseration,  from  the  opinion 
that  those  unhappy  wretches  were  sacrificed,  not  so  much  to  the  public 
welfare  as  to  the  cruelty  of  a  jealous  tyrant." —  Tacitus.3 

This  cruel  subterfuge  accomplished  the  purpose  intended 
by  the  emperor,  to  deliver  him  from  the  angry  suspicion  of 
the  populace.  This  persecution,  however,  as  directed  by 
Nero,  did  not  extend  beyond  the  city,  and  ceased  with  that 
one  effort.  And  from  that  time,  for  the  space  of  nearly  two 
hundred  years  —  till  the  reign  of  Decius,  A.  D.  249-251  — 
there  was  no  imperial  persecution  in  the  city  of  Rome. 
;' During  that  period,  the  Christians  were  in  general  as  free 
and  secure  as  other  inhabitants  of  Home.  Their  assemblies 
were  no  more  disturbed  than  the  synagogues  of  the  Jews,  or 
the  rights  of  other  foreign  religions." — M-ilman.* 


3  "  Annals,"  book  xv,  chap.  xliv.     I  adopt  Gibbon's  Translation.     See  "  De- 
cline and  Fall,"  chap,  xvi,  par.  14. 

4  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  ii,  par.  17,  note. 


GOVERNMENT  OF  DOMITIAN.  H5 


DOMITIAN, 


who  is  next  named  in  the  list  of  persecutors,  was  so  jealous 
of  his  imperial  power  and  withal  such  a  downright  coward, 
that  he  was  afraid  of  every  man  who  was,  or  might  become, 
popular,  or  from  any  cause  conspicuous.  His  suspicions 
were  constantly  creating  imaginary  plots  against  his  throne 
and  his  life,  and  his  fears  welcomed  any  tale  of  treason  or 
of  plot.  There  was  an  ample  number  of  flatterers  and 
sycophants  who  voluntarily  assumed  the  vile  office  of  in- 
formers, to  have  satisfied  perhaps  any  man  in  the  world  but 
Domitian.  He,  however,  was  not  content  with  this. 

He  deliberately  hired  every  man  in  the  empire  who  was 
willing  to  sell  himself  to  such  service.  And  there  were 
multitudes  who  were  willing  so  to  sell  themselves.  This 
system  had  been  employed  by  others,  but  "Domitian  seems, 
of  all  the  emperors,  to  have  carried  it  furthest,  and  adopted 
it  most  systematically.  It  was  an  aggravation  rather  than 
an  extenuation  of  his  crime  that  he  seduced  irito  his  service 
men  of  high  rank  and  character,  and  turned  the  Senate  into 
a  mob  of  rivals  for  the  disgrace  of  thus  basely  serving  him. 
The  instruments  of  his  jealous  precaution  rose  in  a  gradu- 
ated hierarchy.  The  knights  and  senators  trembled  before 
a  Massa  Bsebius,  a  Carus,  and  a  Latinus  ;  but  these  delators 
trembled  in  their  turn  before  the  prince  of  delators,  Mem- 
mius  Regulus,  and  courted  him,  not  always  successfully,  by 
the  surrender  of  their  estates  or  their  mistresses.  .  .  .  The 
best  and  noblest  of  the  citizens  were  still  marked  out  as  the 
prey  of  delators  whose  patron  connived  at  enormities  which 
bound  their  agents  more  closely  to  himself,  and  made  his 
protection  more  necessary  to  them.  The  haughty  nobler, 
quailed  in  silence  under  a  system  in  which  every  act,  every 
word,  every  sigh,  was  noted  against  them,  and  disgrace, 
exile,  and  death  followed  upon  secret  whispers.  The  fears 
of  Domitian  increased  with  his  severities.  He  listened  to 
the  tales  not  of  senators  and  consulars  only,  but  of  the  hum- 


116  THE   "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

blest  officials  arid  even  of  private  soldiers.  Often,  says 
Epictetus,  was  the  citizen,  sitting  in  the  theater,  entrapped 
by  a  disguised  legionary  beside  him,  who  pretended  to  mur- 
mur against  the  emperor,  till  he  had  led  his  unsuspecting 
neighbor  to  confide  to  him  his  own  complaints,  and  then 
skulked  away  to  denounce  him."  —  Merivale? 

Such  a  system  gave  full  and  perfect  freedom  to  vent 
every  kind  of  petty  spite  ;  and  not  only  was  freedom  given 
to  it,  but  by  the  informers'  receiving  a  share  of  the  property 
of  the  accused,  a  premium  was  put  upon  it.  Many  were  put 
to  death  to  allay  Domitian's  fears.  Large  numbers  of  others 
were  either  put  to  death  or  banished  for  the  sake  of  their 
property,  and  yet  many  others  were  executed  or  banished 
upon  charges  invented  by  the  informers  to  satisfy  their  per- 
sonal hatred  or  to  maintain  with  the  emperor  their  standing 
of  loyalty.  Among  the  victims  of  this  universal  treachery, 
some  Christians  were  numbered.  Hated  as  they  were,  it 
would  have  been  strange  indeed  had  there  been  none. 
Among  these  was  the  apostle  John,  who  was  banished  to 
the  Isle  of  Patmos.  There  were  two  others  whose  names 
we  know —  Flavius  Clemens  and  his  wife  Domitilla.  Clem- 
ens was  the  cousin,  and  Domitilla  was  the  niece,  of  Domi- 
tian.  Clemens  had  enjoyed  the  favor  of  the  emperor  for  a 
long  time,  and  attained  the  honor  of  the  consulship.  The 
term  of  his  office,  however,  had  hardly  more  than  expired 
when  he  was  accused,  condemned,  and  executed  ;  and  Domi- 
tilla was  banished  to  a  desolate  island  on  the  western  coast 
of  Italy.  The  charge  against  them  was  "atheism  and  Jew- 
ish manners,"  "which  cannot  with  any  propriety  be  applied 
except  to  the  Christians,  as  they  were  obscurely  and  imper- 
fectly viewed  by  the  magistrates  and  by  the  writers  of  that 
period."  -  Gibbon.6 

A  great  number  of  other  persons  were  involved  in  the 
same  accusation  as  were  Clemens  and  Domitilla,  and  like- 

5  "Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap.  Ixii,  par.  17. 

6  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xvi,  par.  18. 


Two   REPUBLICS. 


ID 


FLINT  AND    THE   CHRISTIANS.  H7 

wise  met  the  same  fate  with  them  —  confiscation  of  goods 
and  banishment  or  death.  Yet  it  is  with  no  manner  of  jus- 
tice or  propriety  that  this  has  been  singled  out  as  a  persecu- 
tion against  the  church,  or  of  Christians  as  such  ;  because  at 
the  same  time  there  were  thousands  of  people  of  all  classes 
who  suffered  the  same  things  and  from  the  same  source. 
This  is  granting  that  Clemens  was  killed  and  Domitilla  ban- 
ished really  on  account  of  their  religion.  Considering  their 
kinship  to  the  emperor,  and  the  standing  of  Clemens,  it 
is  fairly  questionable  whether  it  was  not  for  political  reasons 
that  they  were  dealt  with,  and  whether  their  religion  was  not 
the  pretext  rather  than  the  cause,  of  their  punishment.  And 
for  political  crimes  especially  it  was  no  unusual  thing  for  all 
of  a  man's  friends  and  relations  to  be  included  in  the  same 
proscription  with  himself.  "This  proscription  took  place 
about  eight  months  before  Domitian's  death,  at  a  period 
when  he  was  tormented  by  the  utmost  jealousy  of  all  around, 
and  when  his  heart  was  hardened  to  acts  of  unparalleled  bar- 
barity ;  and  it  seems  more  likely  that  it  was  counseled  by 
abject  fear  for  his  own  person  or  power,  than  by  concern 
for  the  religious  interests  of  the  State."  —  Merivale.1 

In  September,  A.  D.  96,  Domitian  was  succeeded  by  — 

NEKVA, 

whose  temper  and  administration  were  directly  contrary  to 
those  of  Domitian.  lie  reversed  the  cruel  decrees  of  Domi- 
tian, recalled  the  banished,  and  prosecuted  instead  of  en- 
couraged the  informers.  Nerva  was  succeeded  in  A.  D.  98 
by- 

TEA  JAN, 

under  whom  Pliny  the  Younger  was  governor  of  the  province 
of  Bithynia.  In  that  province  he  found  Christianity  so 
prevalent  that  the  worship  of  the  gods  was  almost  deserted. 
He  undertook  to  correct  this  irregularity  ;  but  this  being  a 
new  sort  of  business  with  him,  lie  was  soon  involved  in 

7  "  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap.  Ixii,  par.  15. 


118  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

questions  that  he  could  not  easily  decide  to  his  own  satisfac- 
tion, and  he  concluded  to  address  the  emperor  for  the 
necessary  instructions.  He  therefore  wrote  to  Trajan  as 
follows  :  — 

"Sir  :  It  is  my  constant  method  to  apply  myself  to  you  for  the  reso- 
lution of  all  my  doubts  ;  for  who  can  better  govern  my  dilatory  way  of 
proceeding  or  instruct  my  ignorance?  I  have  never  been  present  at  the 
examination  of  the  Christians  [by  others],  on  which  account  I  am  unac- 
quainted with  what  uses  to  be  inquired  into,  and  what  and  how  far  they 
used  to  be  punished  ;  nor  are  my  doubts  small,  whether  there  be  not  a 
distinction  to  be  made  between  the  ages  [of  the  accused],  and  whether 
tender  youth  ought  to  have  the  same  punishment  with  strong  men  ? 
whether  there  be  not  room  for  pardon  upon  repentance  ?  or  whether  it 
may  not  be  an  advantage  to  one  that  had  been  a  Christian,  that  he  has 
forsaken  Christianity  ?  whether  the  bare  name,  without  any  crimes 
besides,  or  the  crimes  adhering  to  that  name,  be  to  be  punished  ?  In 
the  meantime  1  have  taken  this  course  about  those  who  have  been 
brought  before  me  as  Christians :  I  asked  them  whether  they  were 
Christians  or  not.  If  they  confessed  that  they  were  Christians,  I  asked 
them  again,  and  a  third  time,  intermixing  threatenings  with  the  ques- 
tions. If  they  persevered  in  their  confessions,  I  ordered  them  to  be 
executed  ;  for  I  did  not  doubt  but,  let  their  confessions  be  of  any  sort 
whatsoever,  this  positiveness  and  inflexible  obstinacy  deserved  to  be  pun- 
ished. There  have  been  some  of  this  mad  sect  whom  I  took  notice  of  in 
particular  as  Roman  citizens,  that  they  might  be  sent  to  that  city.  After 
some  time,  as  is  usual  in  such  examinations,  the  crime  spread  itself,  and 
many  more  cases  came  before  me.  A  libel  was  sent  to  me,  though  with- 
out an  author,  containing  many  names  [of  persons  accused].  These 
denied  that  they  were  Christians  now,  or  ever  had  been.  They  called 
upon  the  gods,  and  supplicated  to  your  image,  which  I  caused  to  be 
brought  to  me  for  that  purpose,  with  frankincense  and  wine  ;  they  also 
cursed  Christ ;  none  of  which  things,  it  is  said,  can  any  of  those  that  are 
really  Christians  be  compelled  to  do  :  so  I  thought  fit  to  let  them  go. 
Others  of  them  that  were  named  in  the  libel,  said  they  were  Christians, 
but  presently  denied  it  again  ;  that  indeed  they  had  been  Christians,  but 
had  ceased  to  be  so,  some  three  years,  some  many  more  ;  and  one  there 
was  that  said  he  had  not  been  so  these  twenty  years.  All  these  wor- 
shiped your  image  and  the  images  of  our  gods  ;  these  also  cursed 
Christ.  However,  they  assured  me  that  the  main  of  their  fault,  or  of 
their  mistake,  was  this  :  That  they  were  wont,  on  a  stated  day,  to  meet 
together  before  it  was  light,  and  to  sing  a  hymn  to  Christ,  as  to  a  god, 
alternately  ;  and  to  oblige  themselves  by  a  sacrament  [or  oath]  not  to  do 


GOVERNMENT  OF   TRAJAN.  H9 

i 

anything  that  was  ill ;  but  that  they  would  commit  no  theft,  or  pilfering, 

or  adultery  ;  that  they  would  not  break  their  promises,  or  deny  what 
was  deposited  with  them,  when  it  was  required  back  again  ;  after  which 
it  was  their  custom  to  depart,  and  to  meet  again  at  a  common  but  inno- 
cent meal,  which  they  had  left  off  upon  that  edict  which  I  published  at 
your  command,  and  wherein  I  had  forbidden  any  such  conventicles. 
These  examinations  made  me  think  it  necessary  to  inquire  by  torments 
what  the  truth  was  ;  which  I  did  of  two  servant-maids,  who  were  called 
"deaconesses;"  but  still  I  discovered  no  more  than  that  they  were 
addicted  to  a  bad  and  to  an  extravagant  superstition.  Hereupon  I  have 
put  off  any  further  examinations,  and  have  recourse  to  you  ;  for  the 
affair  seems  to  be  well  worth  consultation,  especially  on  account  of  the 
number  of  those  "hat  are  in  danger  ;  for  there  are  many  of  every  age,  of 
every  rank,  and  of  both  sexes,  who  are  now  and  hereafter  likely  to  be 
called  to  account,  and  to  be  in  danger ;  for  this  superstition  is  spread 
like  a  contagion,  not  only  into  cities  and  towns,  but  into  country  villages 
also,  which  yet  there  is  reason  to  hope  may  be  stopped  and  corrected. 
To  be  sure,  the  temples,  which  were  almost  forsaken,  begin  already  to 
be  frequented  ;  and  the  holy  solemnities,  which  were  long  intermitted, 
begin  to  be  revived.  The  sacrifices  begin  to  sell  well  everywhere,  of 
which  very  few  purchasers  had  of  late  appeared  ;  whereby  it  is  easy  to 
suppose  how  great  a  multitude  of  men  may  be  amended,  if  place  for 
repentance  be  admitted." 

To  this  letter  Trajan  replied  :  — 

"  My  Pliny  :  You  have  taken  the  method  which  you  ought,  in  examin- 
ing the  causes  of  those  that  had  been  accused  as  Christians  ;  for  indeed  no 
certain  and  general  form  of  judging  can  be  ordained  in  this  case.  These 
people  are  not  to  be  sought  for ;  but  if  they  be  accused  and  convicted, 
they  are  to  be  punished  :  but  with  this  caution,  that  he  who  denies  him- 
self to  be  a  Christian,  and  makes  it  plain  that  he  is  not  so,  by  supplicat- 
ing to  our  gods,  although  he  had  been  so  formerly,  lyay  be  allowed  par- 
don, upon  his  repentance.  As  for  libels  sent  without  an  author,  they 
ought  to  have  no  place  in  any  accusation  whatsoever,  for  that  would  be 
a  thing  of  very  ill  example,  and  not  agreeable  to  my  reign."8 

These  are  the  facts  in  the  case  in  regard  to  the  persecu- 
tion by  Trajan.  As  a  matter  of  fact  Trajan  had  little  to  do 
with  it.  Pliny  found  the  laws  being  violated.  As  governor 
of  a  province,  he  took  judicial  and  executive  cognizance  of 

8  These  two  letters  are  found  in  English  in  Dissertation  iii,  at  the  close  of 
Whiston's  "  Josephus." 


120  THE   "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

it.  In  his  enforcing  of  the  laws  there  were  questions  raised 
which  he  submitted  to  the  emperor  for  decision.  The  em- 
peror informed  him  that  the  proper  course  had  been  pur- 
sued. As  a  lover  of  justice,  he  directed  that  no  regard 
should  be  paid  to  anonymous  communications,  but  that  all 
accusations  should  be  made  in  due  and  legal  form.  He 
even  goes  so  far  as  to  limit  to  the  regular  form  of  judicial 
process  the  Christians'  disregard  of  the  law  —  they  were  not 
to  be  sought  after  ;  but  when  accused  in  regular  form,  if 
they  refused  to  yield,  they  were  to  be  punished.  In  all  this 
it  is  easy  to  see  the  emperor,  who  was  the  representative  of 
the  law  ;  the  just  judge,  refusing  everything  but  the  strictest 
conformity  to  the  regular  legal  proceedings  ;  and  the  hu- 
mane man,  willing  rather  to  forego  opportunity,  than  to  hunt 
for  occasion,  to  prosecute.  It  is  difficult,  therefore,  to  see 
how  Trajan  could  fairly  be  charged  with  persecuting  the 
Christians. 

Trajan  died  in  A.  D.  117,  and  was  succeeded  by  — 


HADRIAN. 


The  fanatical  populace  being  forbidden  by  Trajan's  orders 
to  proceed  against  the  Christians  in  any  but  the  legal  way, 
had  in  many  place's  taken  to  raising  riots  and  wreaking  their 
vengeance  upon  the  Christians  in  this  disorderly  way.  In  A.  D. 
124,  Hadrian  made  a  tour  through  the  Eastern  provinces. 
The  proconsul  of  Asia  Minor  complained  to  him  of  these  riot- 
ous proceedings.  The  emperor  issued  a  rescript  commanding 
that  the  Christians  should  not  be  harassed,  nor  should  inform- 
ers be  allowed  to  ply  their  trade  in  malicious  prosecutions. 
If  those  who  desired  to  prosecute  the  Christians  could  clearly 
prove  their  charges  before  the  tribunal,  "let  them  pursue  this 
course  only,  but  not  by  mere  petitions  and  mere  outcries 
against  the  Christians."  "If  any  one  bring  an  accusation 
and  can  show  that  they  have  done  anything  contrary  to  the 
laws,"  the  magistrate  was  to  judge  of  the  matter  "  according 
to  the  heinousness  of  the  crime  ;  "  but  if  any  one  should  un- 


ANTONINUS  PIUS. 


RIOTOUS  ATTACKS   UPON  THE  CHRISTIANS.       121 

dertake  a  prosecution  of  the  Christians  "  with  a  view  to 
slander,"  the  matter  was  to  be  investigated  "according  to 
its  criminality,"  and  if  it  was  found  that  the  prosecution  had 
been  made  on  false  accusation,  the  false  accusers  were  to  be 
severely  punished. 

This  rescript  is  as  follows  :  — 

"  To  Minucius  Fundanus  :  I  have  received  an  epistle,  written  to  me 
by  the  most  illustrious  Serenius  Granianus,  whom  you  have  succeeded. 
I  do  not  wish,  therefore,  that  the  matter  should  be  passed  by  without 
examination,  so  that  these  men  may  neither  be  harassed,  nor  opportu- 
nity of  malicious  proceedings  be  offered  to  informers.  If,  therefore,  the 
provincials  can  clearly  evince  their  charges  against  the  Christians,  so  as 
to  answer  before  the  tribunal,  let  them  pursue  this  course  only,  but  not 
by  mere  petitions,  and  mere  outcries  against  the  Christians.  For  it  is  far 
more  proper,  if  any  one  would  bring  an  accusation,  that  you  should  ex- 
amine it.  If  any  one,  therefore,  bring  an  accusation,  and  can  show  that 
they  have  done  anything  contrary  to  the  laws,  determine  it  thus  accord- 
ing to  the  heinousness  of  the  crime.  So  that  indeed,  if  any  one  should 
purpose  this  with  a  view  to  slander,  investigate  it  according  to  its  crimi- 
nality, and  see  to  it  that  you  inflict  the  punishment."  9 

Hadrian's  leniency  was  not  from  any  respect  to  the  Chris- 
tians as  such,  but  from  his- own  native  respect  for  justice  and 
fairness.  He  died  A.  D.  138,  and  was  succeeded  by  — 

ANTONINUS    PIUS. 

As  soon  as  Hadrian's  death  was  known,  the  restraints 
imposed  by  his  edicts  were  cast  off,  and  the  sufferings  of 
the  Christians  from  popular  tumult  and  riot  were  renewed. 
The  bitterness  of  the  popular  clamor  was  deepened  by 
serious  disasters.  Disastrous  floods,  earthquakes,  and  tires 
occurred  about  this  time,  all  of  which  the  superstitious 
pagans  interpreted  as  the  evidence  of  the  anger  of  the  gods 
poured  upon  the  empire  as  punishment  for  the  disrespect 
shown  to  the  gods  by  the  Christians,  and  which  was  so 
lightly  dealt  with  by  the  imperial  power.  Antoninus,  how- 
ever, being  doubtless  the  mildest-mannered  man  that  ever 
held  the  imperial  power  of  Rome,  renewed  and  rather  ex- 

•Euseblus's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  iv,  chap.  ix. 


122  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

tended   the  protective  edicts  of   Hadrian.     Antoninus  was 
succeeded  in  A.  D.  161,  by  — 

MARCUS    AUKELIUS. 

Public  calamities  still  continued.  A  terrible  pestilence 
swept  over  the  whole  Roman  empire  from  Ethiopia  to  Gaul, 
and  the  fury  of  the  populace  again  fell  severely  upon  the 
devoted  Christians.  Marcus  Aurelius  saw  this  matter  in 
much  the  same  light  as  the  great  mass  of  the  people,  and 
looked  upon  the  pestilence  that  then  raged,  as  a  warning  to 
restore  the  ancient  religion  in  its  minutest  particulars.  He 
summoned  priests  from  all  quarters  to  Rome,  and  even  put 
off  his  expedition  against  the  Marcomannians  for  the  pur- 
pose of  celebrating  the  religious  solemnities,  by  which  he 
hoped  that  the  evil  might  be  averted.  He  therefore  sanc- 
tioned the  popular  rage  against  the  Christians,  and  followed 
it  up  with  an  edict  in  which  he  commanded  that  search 
should  he  made  for  the  Christians  /  and  when  brought  to 
trial,  they  were  to  he  forced  hy  tortures  to  deny  the  faith  and 
do  homage  to  the  Roman  gods.  Marcus  Aurelius  died,  March 
17,  A.  D.  ISO,  and  was  succeeded  Jby  his  son  — 

COMMODUS. 

This  emperor,  instead  of  being  a  persecutor  of  the  Chris- 
tians, was  rather  a  friend  to  them,  if  such  a  man  could  be 
counted  the  friend  of  anybody.  Commodus,  for  the  first 
three  years  of  his  reign,  was  a  monster  in  vice,  and  after 
that  a  monster  in  cruelty  as  well  as  in  vice.  One  evening 
in  the  third  year  of  his  reign,  as  he  was  returning  from  the 
amphitheater  through  the  dark  passage  to  the  imperial  palace, 
he  was  attacked  by  an  assassin  who  felt  so  certain  of  accom- 
plishing his  bloody  purpose  that  with  a  drawn  sword  he  ex- 
claimed, "The  Senate  sends  you  this."  The  attempt  failed, 
however.  The  guards  protected  the  emperor  and  captured 
the  assassin.  He  confessed  that  his  act  was  the  culmination 
of  a  conspiracy  which  had  originated  with  the  emperor's 
sister  Lucilla,  who  hoped  to  become  empress  by  the  death  of 


F 
i— I 

9 

CD 


GOVERNMENT  OF  COMMODUS.  123 

Commodus.  The  conspirators  were  punished,  Lucilla  being 
first  banished  and  afterwards  put  to  death.  But  the  words 
which  the  assassin  had  uttered — "the  Senate  sends  you 
this"  —  still  rung  in  the  emperor's  ears;  and  by  it  he  was 
caused  to  think  that  the  Senate  was  in  some  way  connected 
with  the  attempt  upon  his  life.  The  whole  body  of  the  Sen- 
ate became  subject  to  his  bitter  and  abiding  enmity.  But  as 
he  had  nothing  more  tangible  than  suspicion  to  guide  him, 
his  course  was  necessarily  uncertain,  until  a  horde  of  inform- 
ers had  arisen  and  turned  his  suspicions  into  facts. 

This  event,  however,  was  not  long  delayed  ;  because  as 
soon  as  it  was  learned  that  the  emperor  desired  to  detect 
treason  in  the  senators,  the  informers,  whose  trade  had  been 
abolished  in  the  mild  and  just  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius, 
readily  reappeared  in  numbers  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  desire 
of  the  emperor.  "Distinction  of  every  kind  soon  became 
criminal.  The  possession  of  wealth  stimulated  the  diligence 
of  the  informers  ;  rigid  virtue  implied  a  tacit  censure  of  the 
jrregularities  of  Commodus  ;  important  services  implied  a 
dangerous  superiority  of  merit ;  and  the  friendship  of  the 
father  always  insured  the  aversion  of  the  son.  Suspicion 
was  equivalent  to  proof  ;  trial  to  condemnation.  The  exe- 
cution of  a  considerable  senator  was  attended  with  the  death 
of  all  who  might  lament  or  revenge  his  fate  ;  and  when 
Commodus  had  once  tasted  human  blood,  he  became  incap- 
able of  pity  or  remorse.  .  .  .  Every  sentiment  of  virtue  and 
humanity  was  extinct  in  the  mind  of  Commodus.  Whilst  he 
thus  abandoned  the  reins  of  .empire  to  these  unworthy 
favorites,  he  valued  nothing  in  sovereign  power,  except  the 
unbounded  license  of  indulging  his  sensual  appetites.  His 
hours  were  spent  in  a  seraglio  of  three  hundred  beautiful 
women,  and  as  many  boys  of  every  rank  and  of  every  prov- 
ince ;  and  wherever  the  arts  of  seduction  proved  ineffectual, 
the  brutal  lover  had  recourse  to  violence.  .  .  .  The  intervals 
of  lust  were  filled  up  with  the  basest,  amusements."  — 
QMbon." 

10  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  iv,  par.  9,  16. 


124:  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

Wild  beasts  were  brought  from  far  countries  that  the 
emperor  might  have  the  honor  of  slaying  them  with  his  own 
hand.  The  African  lion,  in  his  native  haunts,  men  were  for- 
bidden under  heavy  penalty  to  kill  even  in  self-defense,  that 
he  might  be  reserved  for  the  sport  of  the  emperor.  At  last 
he  entered  the  arena  in  the  character  of  a  gladiator,  armed 
with  a  helmet,  a  sword,  and  a  buckler,  and  obliged  gladia- 
tors to  fight  with  him.  armed  only  with  a  net  and  a  leaden 
trident.  He  thus  fought  (?)  seven  hundred  and  thirty-five 
times,  and  each  contest  meant  the  death  of  his  antagonist. 
The  list  of  senators  sacrificed  to  his  suspicions  continued 
still  to  lengthen.  His  cruelty  at  last  arrived  at  that  pitch 
where  nobody  within  his  reach  could  feel  secure  for  an 
hour ;  and  that  they  might  certainly  escape  his  furious 
caprice,  Marcia  his  favorite  concubine,  Eclectus  his  cham- 
berlain, and  Laetus  his  praetorian  prefect,  formed  a  conspir- 
acy to  kill  him.  Marcia  gave  him  a  drink  of  poisoned  wine, 
and  the  poison  was  assisted  in  its  work  by  a  professional 
wrestler  who  strangled  him.  Yet  Coinmodus  icas  not  a  per- 
secutor of  the  Christians ;  but  with  this  exception,  there 
were  few  people  in  all  the  empire  whom  he  did  not  persecute. 
For  some  reason  Marcia  was  friendly  to  the  Christians,  and 
her  influence  with  Commodus,  as  well  as  his  disposition  to  be 
as  unlike  his  father  as  possible,  inclined  him  to  be  favorable 
to  them. 

SEPTIMIUS    SEVEKUS, 

the  fifth  of  the  ' '  ten  persecutors, "  was  emperor  from  A.  D. 
193  to  211.  He  was  at  first  the  friend  of  the  Christians. 
There  were  Christians  among  the  domestics  of  his  house- 
hold. Both  the  nurse  and  the  teacher  of  his  son  Caracalla 
were  Christians,  and  "he  always  treated  with  peculiar  dis- 
tinction several  persons  of  both  sexes  who  had  embraced  the 
new  religion.'1'  —  Gibbon.11  It  must  not  be  supposed,  how- 
ever, that  Severus  himself  was  inclined  to  become  a  Chris- 
tian. Finding  that  the  number  of  Christians  was  rapidly 
increasing,  he  issued  an  edict  in  A.  D.  202  forbidding  any- 

11  Id.,  chap,  xvi,  par.  34. 


SEPTIMTUS   SEVERUS. 


GOVERNMENT  OF  SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS.  125 

body  thereafter  to  adopt  the  new  religion.  This,  however, 
did  not  prohibit  those  who  were  already  Christians  from 
remaining  so.  The  purpose  being  to  check  the  spread  of  the 
new  religion,  he  forbade  any  further  changing  from  the  old 
to  the  new.  Yet  the  result  of  the  edict  was  indirectly  to 
increase  the  hardships  of  the  Christians  under  the  already 
existing  laws.  This  was  the  measure  of  the  persecution  ty 
Septimius  Severus.  But  there  is  another  side  to  the  story  of 
Severus  which,  when  compared  with  this,  shows  that  it  is 
only  by  a  severe  stretch  of  language,  if  not  of  imagination, 
that  the  Christians  could  be  counted  as  persecuted  by  him. 

It  was  through  a  triangular  civil  war  that  Septimius 
Severus  secured  the  imperial  power.  He  was  commander 
of  the  troops  on  the  Illyrian  frontier,  and  was  in  Pannonia. 
Pescennius  Niger  was  commander  of  the  troops  in  Syria. 
Clodius  Albinus  was  governor  of  Britain.  The  troops  of 
Niger  proclaimed  him  emperor ;  and  the  troops  of  Severus 
did  the  same  for  him.  Severus  had  the  advantage  of  being 
nearest  to  Rome.  He  hastened  into  Italy  with  his  army, 
and  was  acknowledged  by  the  Senate  as  lawful  emperor. 
War  immediately  followed  between  Severus  and  Niger. 
Niger  was  defeated  in  two  engagements,  and  slain.  As 
long  as  the  contest  with  Niger  was  uncertain,  Severus  pre- 
tended the  utmost  friendship  for  Albinus  ;  bestowed  upon 
him  the  title  of  Caesar  ;  sent  him  a  letter  in  which  he  called 
him  the  brother  of  his  soul  and  empire  ;  and  charged  the 
messengers  who  carried  the  letter  that  when  they  delivered 
it,  they  should  secure  a  private  audience  with  Albinus  and 
assassinate  him. 

Albinus,  however,  detected  the  conspiracy,  and  by  it 
discovered  that  if  he  were  to  live,  it  would  have  to  be  as 
emperor.  He  crossed  into  Gaul ;  the  armies  met  at  Lyons  ; 
Albinus  was  defeated,  captured,  and  beheaded.  Severus 
discovered  that  the  Senate  had  encouraged  Albinus.  He 
therefore  sent  to  the  Romans  the  head  of  Albinus  with  a 
letter  declaring  that  none  of  the  adherents  of  either  Albinus 
12 


126  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

or  Niger  should  be  spared.  He  did,  however,  pardon  thirty- 
five  senators  who  were  accused  of  having  favored  Albinus, 
while  forty-one  other  senators  with  their  wives,  their  children, 
and  their  friends  were  put  to  death.  The  same  punishment 
was  inflicted  upon  the  most  prominent  characters  of  Spain, 
Gaul,  and  Syria,  while  many  others  were  sent  into  exile,  or 
suffered  the  confiscation  of  all  their  property,  merely  because 
they  had  obeyed  the  governor  under  whose  authority  they 
had  happened  to  fall  in  the  triangular  conflict.  Niger  had 
been  a  popular  governor,  and  many  cities  of  the  East  con- 
tributed to  him  considerable  sums  of  money  when  he  was 
proclaimed  emperor.  All  these  cities  were  deprived  of 
their  honors,  and  were  compelled  to  pay  to  Severus  four 
times  the  amount  that  they  had  contributed  to  Niger.  To 
elevate  to  the  dignity  of  a  persecution  the  treatment  of  the 
Christians  by  Septimius  Severus  in  view  of  his  treatment  of 
the  Roman  Senate  and  whole  cities  and  provinces  of  the 
empire,  bears  too  much  evidence  of  an  attempt  to  make  out 
a  case,  to  be  counted  worthy  of  any  weight. 

Severus  was  succeeded  in  A.  D.  211,  by  his  two  sons, 

CARACALLA  AND  GETA. 

A  little  more  than  a  year  afterward,  Caracalla  murdered 
Geta  in  his  mother's  arms,  who  in  the  struggle  to  protect 
him,  was  wounded  in  the  hand  and  covered  with  blood :  and 
immediately  following,  ' '  under  the  vague  appellation  of 
the  friends  of  Geta,  above  twenty  thousand  persons  of  both 
sexes  suffered  death."  This,  however,  was  but  the  begin- 
ning ;  for  "  Caracalla  was  the  common  enemy  of  mankind." 
He  left  the  city  of  Rome  in  A.  D.  213,  and  spent  the  rest  of 
his  reign,  about  four  years,  in  the  several  provinces  of  the 
empire,  particularly  those  of  the  East,  "  and  every  province 
was  by  turn  the  scene  of  his  rapine  and  cruelty." — Gibbon™ 
The  s'enators  were  compelled  to  accompany  him  wherever 
he  went  and  to  furnish  daily  entertainment  at  immense 

12  Jd,  chap,  vi,  par.  10,  13. 


MAXIMIN. 


GOVERNMENT  Of  CAR  AC  ALL  A. 

expense,  which  he  gave  over  to  his  soldiers.  They  were 
likewise  required  to  build  in  every  city  where  he  would  come, 
magnificent  palaces  and  splendid  theaters  which  he  would 
either  not  visit  at  all  or  else  visit  and  order  at  once  to  be 
torn  down. 

The  property  of  the  most  wealthy  was  confiscated  at 
once,  while  that  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people  was  taken 
under  the  form  of  taxes  heavily  increased.  In  the  city  of 
Alexandria  in  Egypt,  simply  because  they  had  indulged  in 
a  bit  of  raillery  at  his  expense,  he  took  his  station  on  top  of 
the  temple  of  Serapis,  and  commanded  a  general  massacre 
of  the  citizens,  which  he  directed  and  enjoyed  from  his  ele- 
vated station.  Thousands  upon  thousands  of  people  were 
thus  inhumanly  slaughtered.  And  these  are  but  parts  of  his 
wicked  ways.  Yet  Caracalla  is  not  numbered  among  the 
persecutors  of  the  Christians,  nor  did  he,  in  fact,  molest  the 
Christians  as  such.  Yet  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  an 
emperor,  from  Nero  to  Diocletian,  who  caused  as  much 
suffering  to  the  Christians,  as  Caracalla  did  to  almost  every- 
body but  the  Christians.  It  would  not  be  correct,  however, 
to  suppose  that  the  Christians  were  exempt  from  his  rav- 
ages :  they  of  course  shared  the  common  lot  in  his  desperate 
attentions. 

The  next  in  the  list  of  the  "Ten  Persecutors"  is  — 

MAXIMIN. 

In  the  year  235  A.  D.,  Maximin  became  emperor  by  the 
murder  of  the  emperor  Alexander  Severus.  Of  him  and 
the  persecution  of  the  Christians  inflicted  by  him,  the  eccle- 
siastical historian  says  :  — 

"The  emperor  Alexander  being  carried  off  after  a  reign  of  thirteen 
years,  was  succeeded  by  Maximinus,  who,  inflamed  with  hatred  against 
the  house  of  Alexander,  consisting  of  many  believers,  raised  a  persecu- 
tion, and  commanded  at  first  only  the  heads  of  the  churches  to  be  slain, 
as  the  abettors  and  agents  of  evangelical  truth."  —  JSusebius.13 
13  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vi,  chap,  xxviii. 


128  THE  '-'TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

Alexander  Severus  had  not  only  been  a  friend  to  the 
Christians,  but  had  gone  so  far  as  to  place  an  image  of 
Christ  among  his  household  gods.  The  church  in  Rome 
had  appropriated  a  piece  of  land  in  that  city  which  was 
claimed  by  the  Cooks'  Union.  A  dispute  arose  about  it, 
and  the  case  was  brought  to  the  emperor  for  settlement.  He 
decided  in  favor  of  the  church,  saying  that  it  was  better  that 
God  should  be  worshiped  on  that  ground  than  that  it  should 
be  given  up  to  the  cooks.  Through  such  pronounced  favor  of 
the  emperor,  many  Christians  became  connected  with  the 
imperial  household,  and  bishops  were  received  at  court. 
When  Maximin  murdered  the  emperor  Alexander,  the 
Christians  and  the  bishops  to  whom  Eusebius  refers  were 
involved  in  the  massacre.  And  this  is  the  extent  of  Maxi- 
min's  persecution  of  the  Christians. 

Maximin  was  a  barbarian  who  had  risen  from  the  condi- 
tion of  a  Thracian  peasant  to  the  highest  military  command. 
When  he  was  in  humble  circumstances,  he  had  been  slighted 
by  the  Roman  nobles,  and  treated  with  insolence  by  their 
slaves  ;  others  had  befriended  him  in  his  poverty,  and  had 
encouraged  him  in  adversity.  When  he  became  emperor,  he 
took  vengeance  on  all  alike,  for  all  "were  guilty  of  the 
same  crime  —  the  knowledge  of  his  original  obscurity.  For 
this  crime  many  were  put  to  death  ;  and  by  the  execution  of 
several  of  his  benefactors,  Maximin  published,  in  characters 
of  blood,  the  indelible  history  of  his  baseness  and  ingrati- 
tude."—  Gibbon.li  Maximin  was  but  little  less  than  a  wild 
beast  in  the  shape  of  a  man.  Knowing  full  well  his  own 
shameful  inferiority,  he  was  supremely  suspicious  of  every- 
body else.  Being  so  treacherous  and  so  cruel  himself,  he 
was  ready  to  believe  that  every  distinguished  person  was 
guilty  of  treason.  ' '  Italy  and  the  whole  empire  were  in- 
fested with  innumerable  spies  and  informers."  Magnus,  a 
principal  senator,  was  accused  of  conspiracy.  ' '  Without  a 
witness,  without  a  trial,  and  without  an  opportunity  of  de- 

14  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  vii,  par.  8. 


DECIUS. 


PERSECUTION  BT  MAXIMIN.  129 

fense,  Magnus  with  four  thousand  of  his  supposed  accom- 
plices, was  put  to  death.  .  .  .  Confiscation,  exile,  or  simple 
death  were  esteemed  uncommon  instances  of  his  lenity. 
Some  of  the  unfortunate  sufferers  he  ordered  to  be  sewed  up 
in  the  hides  of  slaughtered  animals,  others  to  be  exposed  to 
wild  beasts,  others  again  to  be  beaten  to  death  with  clubs." 
—  Gttbon." 

Such  was  the  conduct  of  Maximin  toward  the  Roman  no- 
bles. He  next,  at  one  single  stroke,  confiscated  all  the  treas- 
ure and  all  the  revenue  of  all  the  cities  of  the  empire,  and 
turned  them  to  his  own  use.  The  temples  everywhere  were 
robbed  of  all  the  gold  and  silver  offerings  ;  "  and  the  statues 
of  gods,  heroes,  and  emperors  were  melted  down,  and 
coined  into  money."  In  many  places  these  robberies  and 
exactions  were  resisted,  the  people  defending  the  rights  of 
their  cities  and  the  sacredness  of  their  temples.  In  such 
cases  massacres  accompanied  the  robbery  of  the  temples  and 
the  confiscation  of  the  cities'  treasures. 

Of  Maximin's  treatment  of  the  Christians,  as  of  that  of 
Domitian  and  Septimius  Severus,  it  is  but  proper  to  remark 
that  to  separate  this  from  all  the  other  evidences  of  his 
cruelty,  which  were  so  wide-spread  and  continuous,  magnify- 
ing this  while  ignoring  all  the  rest  —  in  order  to  bestow  upon 
it  the  distinction  of  a  "persecution" — bears  too  much  evi- 
dence of  an  effort  to  make  out  a  case,  to  be  worthy  of 
indorsement  in  any  sober  or  exact  history. 

The  next  one  in  the  list  of  the  ' '  Ten  Persecutions "  is 
that  by  the  emperor  — 

DECIUS, 

whose  reign  was  but  a  little  more  than  two  years  in  length, 
from  A.  D.  249-251.  Decius  was  a  man  somewhat  after  the 
model  of  Trajan  and  Marcus  Aurelius — devoted  to  Rome, 
her  laws,  and  her  institutions.  His  serious  endeavor  was  to 
bring  back  the  Roman  discipline,  and  the  Roman  virtue  of 
earlier  times.  Therefore,  one  of  the  earliest  acts  of  his  reign 

15 Id.,  par.  9,  10. 


130  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

was  to  revive  the  office  of  censor.  The  choosing  of  the  censor 
was  left  to  the  Senate,  and  as  the  result,  Valerian  was 
unanimously  chosen.  The  speech  which  Decius  made  upon 
the  investiture  of  Yalerian  with  the  insignia  of  his  office,  will 
enable  the  reader  to  form  some  estimate  of  the  ideal  which 
this  emperor  had  formed  for  himself  in  the  matter  of  gov- 
ernment. He  said  :  — 

"Happy  Valerian, — happy  in  the  general  approbation  of  the  Senate 
and  of  the  Roman  republic  !  Accept  the  censorship  of  mankind  :  and 
judge  of  our  manners.  You  will  select  those  who  deserve  to  continue 
members  of  the  Senate  ;  you  will  restore  the  equestrian  order  to  its 
ancient  splendor  ;  you  will  improve  the  revenue,  yet  moderate  the  public 
burdens.  You  will  distinguish  into  regular  classes  the  various  and 
infinite  multitude  of  citizens  ;  and  accurately  review  the  military  strength, 
the  wealth,  the  virtue,  and  the  resources  of  Rome.  Your  decisions  shall 
obtain  the  force  of  laws.  The  army,  the  palace,  the  ministers  of  justice, 
and  the  great  officers  of  the  empire,  are  all  subject  to  your  tribunal. 
None  are  exempted  excepting  only  the  ordinary  consuls,  the  prefect  of 
the  city,  the  king  of  the  sacrifices,  and  (as  long  as  she  preserves  her 
chastity  inviolate)  the  eldest  of  the  vestal  virgins.  Even  these  few,  who 
may  not  dread  the  severity,  will  anxiously  solicit  the  esteem  of  the 
Roman  censor."  16 

With  such  views  of  the  public  needs  and  of  his  duty  as 
emperor  to  restore  the  purity  of  the  old  Roman  discipline, 
it  could  only  be  that  the  effects  of  his  efforts  would  be  first 
felt  by  the  Christians,  because  by  their  denial  of  the  gods 
and  repudiation  of  the  Roman  religion  and  their  denial  of 
the  right  of  the  State  to  interfere  with  their  religious  exer- 
cise or  profession,  they  were  placed  as  the  first  of  the  ene- 
mies of  the  Roman  people.  In  the  year  250  the  persecution 
began.  Rigorous  search  was  ordered  for  all  the  people  who 
were  suspected  of  refusing  to  conform  to  the  Roman  wor- 
ship, with  the  object  of  compelling  them  to  return  to  the 
exercise  of  the  ceremonies  of  the  Roman  religion.  When 
they  were  found,  if  they  refused,  threats  were  first  to  be 
used,  and  if  that  failed,  torture  was  to  be  applied,  and  if 
that  failed,  death  was  to  be  inflicted. 

16  Id.,  chap,  x,  par.  14. 


THE  PERSECUTION  BT  DECIUS.  131 

The  persecution  began  in  Rome,  and  as  there  had  been  a 
long  period  of  peace,  many  of  the  professed  Christians  had 
become  worldly,  and  thought  more  of  increasing  their 
earthly  possessions  than  of  cultivating  the  Christian  virtues. 
Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  who  lived  at  the  time  and  was 
put  to  death  only  a  few  years  afterward,  says  :  — 

"Forgetful  of  what  believers  had  either  done  before  in  the  times  of 
the  apostles,  or  always  ought  to  do,  they,  with  the  insatiable  ardor  of 
covetousness,  devoted  themselves  to  the  increase  of  their  property." l7 

Immediately  upon  the  issuing  of  this  edict,  large  num- 
bers of  these  gave  up  their  profession,  whose  ready  compli- 
ance encouraged  the  emperor  to  suppose  that  it  would  be 
but  an  easy  task  entirely  to  suppress  the  Christian  faith. 
Bishops  themselves  had  set  the  people  an  example  in  worldly 
degeneracy,  for  says  Cyprian  of  them  :  — 

"Among  the  priests  there  was  no  devotedness  of  religion  ;  among 
the  ministers  there  was  no  sound  faith  :  in  their  works  there  was  no 
mercy  ;  in  their  manners  their  was  no  discipline.  In  men,  their  beards 
were  defaced ;  in  women,  their  complexion  was  dyed  :  the  eyes  were 
falsified  from  what  God's  hand  had  made  them  ;  their  hair  was  stained 
with  a  falsehood.  Crafty  frauds  were  used  to  deceive  the  hearts  of  the 
simple,  subtle  meanings  for  circumventing  the  brethren.  They  united 
in  the  bond  of  marriage  with  unbelievers  ;  they  prostituted  the  members 
of  Christ  to  the  Gentiles.  They  would  swear  not  only  rashly,  but  even 
more,  would  swear  falsely ;  would  despise  those  set  over  them  with 
haughty  swelling,  would  speak  evil  of  one  another  with  envenomed 
tongue,  would  quarrel  with  one  another  with  obstinate  hatred.  Not 
a  few  bishops  who  ought  to  furnish  both  exhortation  and  example  to 
others,  despising  their  divine  charge,  became  agents  in  secular  business, 
forsook  their  throne,  deserted  their  people,  wandered  about  over  foreign 
provinces,  hunted  the  markets  for  gainful  merchandise,  while  brethren 
were  starving  in  the  church.  They  sought  to  possess  money  in  hoards, 
they  seized  estates  by  crafty  deceits,  they  increased  their  gains  by  mul- 
tiplying usuries." —  Cyprian.16 

Seeing,  then,  that  so  many  of  the  people  had  so  readily 
renounced  their  profession,  and  believing  that  the  influence 

17  "Ante-Nicene  Fathers,"  Treatises  of  Cyprian,  "  On  the  Lapsed,"  chap.  vi.    IS  Id. 


132  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

of  the  bishops  was  to  a  large  extent  the  cause  of  the  exist- 
ence and  spread  of  Christianity,  and  seeing  the  character  of 
many  of  them  thus  displayed,  the  efforts  of  Decius  were  first 
directed  at  these  with  the  hope  that  if  their  influence  was 
checked,  it  would  be  easy  to  restore  the  Roman  worship. 
But  it  could  not  be  made  to  succeed.  If  a  bishop  was  im- 
prisoned or  banished,  it  only  bound  his  flock  closer  to  him  ; 
if  he  was  put  to  death,  by  his  example  others  were  only  en- 
couraged to  be  the  more  faithful  to  their  profession  ;  and 
thus,  although  the  persecution  began  with  the  bishops,  it 
soon  embraced  the  people  ;  and  although  it  had  its  begin- 
ning in  Rome,  it  soon  extended  throughout  the  empire. 

Thus  began  the  first  imperial  persecution  that  there  had 
been  in  the  city  of  Rome  since  that  of  Nero,  and  the  first 
one  which  really  spread  over  the  whole  empire.  Wherever 
the  edict  was  published,  the  idea  was  always  by  mild  meas- 
ures first,  if  possible,  to  restore  the  Roman  worship  every- 
where ;  and  it  was  only  when  the  milder  measures  failed, 
that  the  severer  were  employed,  even  to  death.  Being  so 
wide-spread,  the  Decian  persecution  was  thus  the  severest 
that  had  ever  yet  been  inflicted  upon  the  Christians  by  any 
emperor ;  yet  it  continued  only  about  two  years,  for  the 
emperor  lost  his  life  in  a  battle  with  the  Goths  in  December, 
251. 

The  author  of  the  next  of  the  "Ten  Persecutions" 
was  — 

VALERIAN, 

who  became  emperor  in  August,  253.  At  first  he  was  fav- 
orable to  the  Christians.  Indeed,  Dionysius,  as  quoted  by 
Eusebius,  says  that  "never  was  there  any  of  the  emperors 
before  him  so  favorably  and  benevolently  disposed  toward 
them;"  that,  "in  the  commencement  of  his  reign"  he 
' '  plainly  received  them  with  excessive  civility  and  friend- 
ship ;"  and  that  the  emperor's  house  "was  filled  with  pious 
persons,  and  was,  indeed,  a  congregation  of  the  Lord."1' 

19Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vii,  chap.  x. 


GALLIENUS. 


CHRISTIANITY  LEGALIZED.  133 

This  is  probably  somewhat  extravagant,  but  that  the  em- 
peror was  friendly  to  the  Christians  at  the  beginning  of  his 
reign,  is  very  evident. 

This  leniency  continued  till  the  year  257,  when  his  con- 
duct toward  them  was  reversed  ;  but,  like  Decius,  he  hoped 
to  put  an  end  to  Christianity  without  the  employment  of 
violent  measures.  He  endeavored  first  to  compel  the  church 
leaders, —  the  bishops,  the  presbyters,  and  the  deacons, —  to 
renounce  Christianity,  expecting  that  the  people  would  fol- 
low their  example.  This  failing,  he  next  forbade  their  hold- 
ing meetings  ;  likewise  failing  in  this,  an  edict  was  issued  in 
258  commanding  them  to  be  put  to  death  at  once.  The  sen- 
ators and  knights  who  were  Christians,  were  to  be  deprived 
of  their  rank  and  property,  and  if  they  still  persevered,  they 
were  to  be  beheaded.  Women  of  rank  who  were  Christians, 
were  to  be  deprived  of  their  property  and  banished.  Sixtus, 
the  Roman  bishop,  and  four  deacons  of  the  church  in  Rome 
were  put  to  death  under  this  edict  in  August.  This  persecu- 
tion came  to  an  end  in  260,  when  Valerian  was  taken  pris- 
oner by  the  king  of  Persia.  He  was  succeeded  in  the  em- 
pire by  his  son  — 

GALLIENTTS, 

who  not  only  immediately  put  a  stop  to  the  persecution,  but 
issued  an  edict  which  in  effect  recognized  Christianity  as 
among  the  lawful  religions  of  the  Roman  empire,  by  com- 
manding that  the  church  property  should  be  restored  ;  for 
none  but  legally  existing  bodies  could  legally  hold  common 
property. 

Yet  this  man  who  showed  himself  to  be  such  a  friend  to 
the  Christians  as  to  make  their  religion  legal,  was  very  little 
behind  Maximin  in  his  cruelty  to  every  one  but  the  Chris- 
tians. During  his  reign  there  arose  nineteen  usurpers  in 
different  parts  of  the  empire,  of  whom  there  was  not  one 
"who  enjoyed  a  life  of  peace  or  died  a  natural  death."  Gal- 
lienus  was  so  fortunate  as  to  be  successful  over  them  all,  yet 
their  efforts  kept  the  empire  in  a  state  of  constant  ferment, 


134  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

and  the  disposition  of  Gallienus  toward  all  may  be  gathered 
from  a  command  that  he  issued  with  respect  to  one  Inge- 
nuus,  who  assumed  the  office  of  emperor  in  the  province  of 
Illyricum.  When  the  revolt  had  been  quelled,  Gallienus 
wrote  to  his  minister  there  these  words  :  — 

"It  is  not  enough  that  you  exterminate  such  as  have  appeared  in 
arms  :  the  chance  of  battle  might  have  served  me  as  effectually.  Tke 
male  sex  of  every  age  must  be  extirpated  ;  provided  that,  in  the  execu- 
tion of  the  children  and  old  men,  you  can  contrive  means  to  save  our 
reputation.  Let  every  one  die  who  has  dropped  an  expression,  who  has 
entertained  a  thought,  against  me,  against  me  —  the  son  of  Valerian,  the 
father  and  brother  of  so  many  princes.  Remember  that  Ingenuus  was 
made  emperor :  tear,  kill,  hew  in  pieces.  I  write  to  you  with  my  own 
hand,  and  would  inspire  you  with  my  own  feelings." —  Gibbon.20 

This  being  a  sample  of  things  in  nineteen  different  parts 
of  the  empire,  it  will  be  seen  that  under  Gallienus  as  under 
some  of  the  others  whom  we  have  named,  although  the 
Christians  were  unmolested,  they  were  about  the  only  people 
in  the  empire  who  were  so. 

The  next  one  in  the  list  of  the  ten  persecutors  is  — 

AUEELIAN, 

who  became  emperor  in  A.  D.  2TO.  His  persecution,  like 
that  of  some  of  the  others  in  the  list,  is  a  myth.  So  far 
from  Aurelian's  being  a  persecutor  or  an  enemy  of  the 
Christians,  or  one  whom  they  dreaded,  the  bishops  them- 
selves appealed  to  him  in  one  of  their  intestine  contro- 
versies. 

Paul  of  Samosata  was  Bishop  of  Antioch,  and  like  many 
other  bishops  of  his  day,  he  assumed  a  style  and  an  arro- 
gance becoming  an  emperor  of  Rome  rather  than  a  servant 
of  Christ.  He  was  accused  of  heresy  and  tried  by  a  council 
of  bishops,  who  pronounced  him  deposed,  and  named  another 
to  be  seated  in  his  place.  But,  although  they  could  easily 
enough  pronounce  him  deposed,  it  was  another  thing  to 
unseat  him  in  fact.  Paul  held  his  bishopric  in  spite  of 
20  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  x,  par.  50. 


13 


AUKELIAN. 


THE   TEN  PERSECUTIONS  A    FABLE.  135 

them.  The  council  then  appealed  to  Aurelian  to  enforce 
their  decree  and  compel  Paul  to  vacate  the  bishopric. 
Aurelian  refused  to  decide  the  question  himself,  but  referred 
them  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  saying  that  whoever  the  bish- 
ops of  Rome  and  Italy  should  decide  to  be  the  proper  per- 
son, should  have  the  office.  They  decided  against  Paul, 
and  Aurelian  compelled  him  to  relinquish  his  seat.  After- 
ward, however,  in  the  last  year  of  his  reign,  as  it  proved  to 
be,  Eusebius  says  that  Aurelian  was  persuaded  to  raise  per- 
secution against  the  Christians,  and  the  rumor  was  spread 
abroad  everywhere  ;  yet  before  any  decree  was  issued,  death 
overtook  him.  This  is  the  history  of  Aurelian  as  one  of  the 
''Persecutors,"  and  this  is  the  history  of  "the  ninth  perse- 
cution." 

The  tenth  persecution,  that  of  Diocletian,  was  a  persecu- 
tion indeed.  We  shall  not  dwell  upon  it  here,  because  it 
will  have  to  be  noticed  fully  in  another  place. 

The  evidence  here  presented,  however,  is  sufficient  to 
show  that  the  story  of  the  Ten  Persecutions  is  a  fable.  That 
both  events  and  names  have  been  forced  into  service  to 
make  up  the  list  of  ten  persecutions  and  to  find  among  the 
Roman  emperors  ten  persecutors,  the  history  plainly  shows. 

The  history  shows  that  only  five  of  the  so-called  ten 
persecutors  can  by  any  fair  construction  be  counted  such. 
These  five  were  Nero,  Marcus  Aurelius,  Valerian,  Decius, 
and  Diocletian.  Of  the  other  five  Trajan  not  only  added 
nothing  to  the  laws  already  existing,  but  gave  very  mild  di- 
rections for  the  enforcement  of  these,  which  abated  rather 
than  intensified  the  troubles  of  the  Christians.  It  would  be 
difficult  to  see  how  any  directions  could  have  been  more  mild 
without  abrogating  the  laws  altogether,  which  to  Trajan  would 
liave  been  only  equivalent  to  subverting  the  empire  itself. 
Domitian  was  not  a  persecutor  of  the  Christians  as  such,  but 
was  cruel  to  all  people  ;  and  in  common  with  others,  some 
Christians  suffered,  and  suffered  only  as  did  others  who 
were  not  Christians.  Septimius  Severus  only  forbade  any 


136  THE  "TEN  PERSECUTIONS." 

more  people  to  become  Christians  without  particularly  inter- 
fering with  such  as  were  already  Christians.  The  cruelty  of 
Maximin,  more  bitter  even  than  that  of  Domitian,  involved 
all  classes,  and  where  it  overtook  Christians,  that  which 
befell  them  was  but  the  common  lot  of  thousands  and  thou- 
sands of  people  who  were  not  Christians.  Aurelian  was 
not  in  any  sense  a  persecutor  of  the  Christians  in  fact.  At 
the  utmost  stretch,  he  only  contemplated  it.  Had  he  lived 
longer,  he  might  have  been  a  persecutor ;  but  it  is  not 
honest  to  count  a  man  a  persecutor  who  at  the  most  only 
intended  to  persecute.  It  is  not  fair  in  such  a  case  to  turn 
an  intention  into  a  fact. 

Looking  again  at  the  record  of  the  five  who  really  were 
persecutors,  it  is  found  that  from  Nero  to  Marcus  Aurelius 
was  ninety-three  years  ;  that  from  Marcus  Aurelius  to  Decius 
was  eighty  years  ;  that  from  Decius  to  Valerian's  edict  was 
six  years  ;  and  that  from  the  edict  of  Gallienus  to  Diocletian's 
edict  of  persecution  was  forty-three  years.  From  the  record 
of  this  period,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  found  that  between 
Nero  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  Domitian  and  Yitellius  raged  ; 
that  between  Marcus  and  Decius,  the  savage  Commodus  and 
Caracalla,  and  Elagabalus  and  Maximin,  all  ravaged  the  em- 
pire like  wild  boars  a  forest ;  and  that  next  after  Valerian 
came  Gallienus. 

From  these  facts  it  must  be  admitted  that  if  the  persecu- 
tion of  the  Christians  by  Pagan  Rome  depended  upon  the 
action  of  the  emperors,  and  if  it  is  to  be  attributed  to  them, 
Christians  had  not  much  more  to  bear  than  had  the  generality 
of  people  throughout  the  empire.  In  short,  the  story  of 
the  "  Ten  Persecutions"  is  a  myth. 


CHAPTER  V. 


CHRISTIANITY   AND   THE   ROMAN    EMPIRE. 

A  LTHOUGH  the  tale  of  the  "Ten  Persecutions"  is  a 
I\  myth,  this  is  not  by  any  means  to  pronounce  as  myths 
all  stories  of  the  persecution  of  Christians  by  Pagan  Rome. 
Though  there  were  not  ten  persecutions  as  such,  there  was 
one  continuous  persecution,  only  with  variations,  for  two 
hundred  and  fifty  years. 

Nor  is  it  strictly  correct  to  speak  of  this  as  the  persecu- 
tion of  Christians  by  the  Romans.  It  was  all  this,  it  is 
true,  but  it  was  much  more.  The  controversy  between  the 
Christians  and  the  Romans  was  not  a  dispute  between  indi- 
viduals, or  a  contention  between  sects  or  parties.  It  was  a 
contest  between  antagonistic  principles.  It  was,  therefore, 
a  contest  between  Christianity  and  Rome,  rather  than  be- 
tween Christians  and  Romans.  On  the  part  of  Christianity 
it  was  the  proclamation  of  the  principle  of  genuine  liberty  ; 
on  the  part  of  Rome  it  was  the  assertion  of  the  principle  of 
genuine  despotism.  On  the  part  of  Christianity  it  was  the 
assertion  of  the  principle  of  the  rights  of  conscience  and  of 
the  individual  ;  on  the  part  of  Rome  it  was  the  assertion  of 
the  principle  of  the  absolute  absorption  of  the  individual, 
and. his  total  enslavement  to  the  State  in  all  things,  divine 
as  well  as  human,  religious  as  well  as  civil. 

This  is  detected  by  a  mere  glance  again  at  the  actions  of 
the  emperors  whom  we  have  named  in  the  previous  chapter. 
With  the  exception  of  Nero,  the  emperors  who  persecuted 
the  Christians  most,  were  among  the  best  that  Rome  ever 

[137] 


138         CHRISTIANITY  AND   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

had  ;  while  those  emperors  who  were  the  very  worst,  perse- 
cuted the  Christians,  as  such,  the  least  or  not  at  all.  Mar- 
cus Aurelius,  indeed,  is  acknowledged  not  only  to  have 
been  one  of  the  best  of  the  Roman  emperors,  but  one  of  the 
best  men  of  all  pagan  times  ;  while  on  the  other  hand, 
Doinitian,  and  Vitellius,  and  Cornmodus,  and  Caracalla, 
and  Elagabalus,  and  Maximin,  were  not  only  the  worst  of 
Roman  emperors,  but  among  the  worst  of  all  men.  While 
on  the  part  of  those  emperors  who  persecuted  the  Christians 
it  was  not  cruelty  that  caused  them  to  do  so  ;  on  the  part  of 
the  others  named  who  did  not  persecute  the  Christians  as 
such,  but  who  persecuted  everybody  indiscriminately,  it  was 
nothing  but  cruelty  that  caused  them  to  do  so.  With  the 
exception  of  Nero,  it  was  invariably  the  best  of  the  emper- 
ors who  persecuted  the  Christians ;  and  they  invariably  did 
it,  not  because  they  were  cruel  and  delighted  to  see  peo- 
ple suffer,  but  only  by  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  which 
were  already  extant ;  by  way  of  respect  to  institutions  long 
established ;  and  to  preserve  a  system  the  fall  of  which, 
to  them,  meant  the  fall  of  the  empire  itself. 

The  best  men  naturally  cared  most  for  the  Roman  insti- 
tutions and  held  as  most  sacred  the  majesty  of  Rome  and 
the  dignity  of  Roman  law  as  the  expression  of  that  majesty. 
Being  thus  the  most  jealous  of  the  Roman  integrity  and 
Roman  institutions,  any  disregard  of  the  majesty  of  Rome, 
or  any  infraction  of  the  laws,  would  not  be  suffered  by  them 
to  go  unnoticed.  Christians,  caring  nothing  for  the  maj- 
esty of  Rome  in  view  of  the  awful  majesty  of  Jesus  Christ, 
not  only  disregarded  the  Roman  laws  on  the  subject  of  re- 
ligion, but  asserted  the  right  to  disregard  them ;  and  held  it 
to  be  the  most  sacred  and  heaven-enjoined  duty  to  spread 
abroad  these  views  to  all  people.  Consequently,  in  the  very 
nature  of  things,  these  would  be  the  first  ones  to  incur  the 
displeasure  of  those  emperors  who  held  sacred  the  Roman 
institutions.  On  the  other  hand,  those  emperors  who  cared 
little  or  nothing  for  anything  but  the  gratification  of  their 


pREEbOM  IN  JESUS   CHRIST.  139 

appetites  and  passions,  and  the  indulgence  of  their  cruel 
propensities,  cared  little  or  nothing  whether  the  Christians 
obeyed  the  laws  or  not.  They  themselves  cared  nothing  for 
the  laws,  the  manners,  or  the  institutions  of  Rome,  and  they 
cared  little  whether  other  people  cared  for  these  things 
or  not. 

Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world  to  set  men  free,  and  to 
plant  in  their  souls  the  genuine  principle  of  liberty, —  liberty 
actuated  by  love, —  liberty  too  honorable  to  allow  itself 
to  be  used  as  an  occasion  to  the  flesh,  or  for  a  cloak  of 
maliciousness, —  liberty  led  by  a  conscience  enlightened  by 
the  Spirit  of  God, —  liberty  in  which  man  may  be  free  from 
all  men,  yet  made  so  gentle  by  love  that  he  would  willingly 
become  the  servant  of  all,  in  order  to  bring  them  to  the 
enjoyment  of  this  same  liberty.  This  is  freedom  indeed. 
This  is  the  freedom  which  Christ  gave  to  man ;  for,  whom 
the  Son  makes  free  is  free  indeed.  In  giving  to  men  this 
freedom,  such  an  infinite  gift  could  have  no  other  result 
than  that  which  Christ  intended  ;  namely,  to  bind  them  in 
everlasting,  unquestioning,  unswerving  allegiance  to  him  as 
the  royal  benefactor  of  the  race.  He  thus  reveals  himself 
to  men  as  the  highest  good,  and  brings  them  to  himself  as 
the  manifestation  of  that  highest  good,  and  to  obedience  to 
his  will  as  the  perfection  of  conduct.  Jesus  Christ  was  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh.  Thus  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling 
the  world  to  himself,  that  they  might  know  him,  the  only 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  he  sent.  He  gathered  to 
himself  disciples,  instructed  them  in  his  heavenly  doctrine, 
endued  them  with  power  from  on  high,  sent  them  forth  into 
all  the  world  to  preach  this  gospel  of  freedom  to  every 
creature,  and  to  teach  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever 
he  had  commanded  them. 

The  Roman  empire  then  filled  the  world, —  "the  sublim- 
est  incarnation  of  power,  and  a  monument  the  mightiest  of 
greatness  built  by  human  hands,  which  has  upon  this  planet 
been  suffered  to  appear."  That  empire,  proud  of  its  con- 


140         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

quests,  and  exceedingly  jealous  of  its  claims,  asserted  its 
right  to  rule  in  all  things,  human  and  divine.  In  the 
Roman  view,  the  State  took  precedence  of  everything.  It 
was  entirely  out  of  respect  to  the  State  and  wholly  to  pre- 
serve the  State,  that  either  the  emperors  or  the  laws  ever 
forbade  the  exercise  of  the  Christian  religion.  According 
to  Roman  principles,  the  State  was  the  highest  idea  of  good. 
"  The  idea  of  the  State  was  the  highest  idea  of  ethics  ;  and 
within  that  was  included  all  actual  realization  of  the  highest 
good  ;  hence  the  development  of  all  other  goods  pertaining 
to  humanity,  was  made  dependent  on  this." — JVeander.1 

Man  with  all  that  he  had  was  subordinated  to  the  State  ; 
he  must  have  no  higher  aim  than  to  be  a  servant  of  the  State  ; 
he  must  seek  no  higher  good  than  that  which  the  State  could 
bestow.  Thus  every  Roman  citizen  was  a  subject,  and 
every  Roman  subject  was  a  slave.  "  The  more  distinguished 
a  Roman  became,  the  less  was  he  a  free  man.  The  omnipo- 
tence of  the  law,  the  despotism  of  the  rule,  drove  him  into  a 
narrow  circle  of  thought  and  action,  and  his  credit  and 
influence  depended  on  the  sad  austerity  of  his  life.  The 
whole  duty  of  man,  with  the  humblest  and  greatest  of  the 
Romans,  was  to  keep  his  house  in  order,  and  be  the  obedient 
servant  of  the  State." — Jlommsen.2 

It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  for  any  man  to  profess  the 
principles  and  the  name  of  Christ,  was  virtually  to  set  him- 
self against  the  Roman  empire ;  for  him  to  recognize  God 
as  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  highest  good,  was  but 
treason  against  the  Roman  State.  It  was  not  looked  upon 
by  Rome  as  anything  else  than  high  treason  ;  because  as  the 
Roman  State  represented  to  the  Roman  the  highest  idea  of 

lu  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  ind  Church,"  vol.  i,  part  i,  Section  First, 
dlv.  3,  par.  1. 

2  Quoted  by  James  Freeman  Clarke  in  "Ten  Great  Religions,"  chap,  viii,  sec. 
iv,  par.  1.  He  does  not  cite  the  place  where  Mommsen  says  it.  I  have  noted 
quite  carefully  Mommsen's  "  History  of  Rome,"  and  have  not  found  it.  The 
substance  of  it  is  there,  in  book  iii,  chap,  xiii,  par.  1,  but  this  quotation  itself  is 
not  there.  It  must  have  been  taken  from  some  other  of  Mommsen's.  works. 


PAGAN  IDEA    OF   THE  STATE. 

good,  for  any  man  to  assert  that  there  was  a  higher  good, 
was  to  make  Rome  itself  subordinate.  And  this  would  not 
be  looked  upon  in  any  other  light  by  Roman  pride  than  as  a 
direct  blow  at  the  dignity  of  Rome,  and  subversive  of  the  Ro- 
man State.  Consequently  the  Christians  were  not  only  called 
"atheists,"  because  they  denied  the  gods,  but  the  accusation 
against  them  before  the  tribunals  was  of  the  crime  of  "  high 
treason,"  because  they  denied  the  right  of  the  State  to  inter- 
fere with  men's  relations  to  God.  The  common  accusation 
against  them  was  that  they  were  "irreverent  to  the  Caesars, 
and  enemies  of  the  Caesars  and  of  the  Roman  people. " 

To  the  Christian,  the  word  of  God  asserted  with  abso- 
lute authority:  "Fear  God,  and  keep  his  commandments; 
for  this  is  the  whole  duty  of  man."  Eccl.  xii,  13.  To  him, 
obedience  to  this  word  through  faith  in  Christ,  was  eternal 
life.  This  to  him  was  the  conduct  which  showed  his  alle- 
giance to  God  as  the  highest  good, —  a  good  as  much  higher 
than  that  of  the  Roman  State %as  the  government  of  God  is 
greater  than  was  the  government  of  Rome. 

This  idea  of  the  State,  was  not  merely  the  State  as  a 
civil  institution,  but  as  a  divine  institution,  and  the  highest 
conception  of  divinity  itself.  The  genius  of  Rome  was  the 
supreme  deity.  Thus  the  idea  of  the  State  as  the  highest 
good  was  the  religious  idea,  and  consequently  religion  was 
inseparable  from  the  State.  All  religious  views  were  to  be 
held  subordinate  to  the  State,  and  all  religion  was  only  the 
servant  of  the  State. 

The  Roman  State  being  the  chief  deity,  the  gods  of 
Rome  derived  their  dignity  from  the  State  rather  than 
the  State  deriving  any  honor  from  them.  And  the  genius 
of  the  Roman  State  being  to  the  Roman  mind  the  chief 
deity,  as  Rome  had  conquered  all  nations,  it  was  demon- 
strated to  the  Roman  mind  that  Rome  was  superior  to  all 
the  gods  that  were  known.  And  though  Rome  allowed 
conquered  nations  to  maintain  the  worship  of  their  national 
gods,  these  as  well  as  the  conquered  people  were  considered 


142         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

only  as  servants  of  the  Roman  State.  Every  religion  was 
held  subordinate  to  the  religion  of  Rome,  and  though  ' '  all 
forms  of  religion  might  come  to  Rome  and  take  their  places 
in  its  pantheon,  they  must  come  as  the  servants  of  the 
State." 

.  The  State  being  the  Roman's  conception  of  the  highest 
good,  Rome's  own  gods  derived  all  their  dignity  from,  the 
fact  that  they  were  recognized  as  such  by  the  State.  It  was 
counted  by  the  Romans  an  act  of  the  greatest  condescension 
and  an  evidence  of  the  greatest  possible  favor  to  bestow 
State  recognition  upon  any  foreign  gods,  or  to  allow  any 
Roman  subject  to  worship  any  other  gods  than  those  which 
were  recognized  as  such  by  the  Roman  State.  A  funda- 
mental maxim  of  Roman  legislation  was, — 

"  No  man  shall  have  for  himself  particular  gods  of  his  own  ;  no  man 
shall  worship  by  himself  any  new  or  foreign  gods,  unless  they  are  recog- 
nized by  the  public  laws." —  Cicero.3 

Again  :  the  Roman  State  being  the  supreme  deity,  the 
Senate  and  people  were  but  the  organs  through  which  its 
ideas  were  expressed  ;  hence  the  maxirn,  Vox  populi,  vox 
dei, —  the  voice  of  the  people  is  the  voice  of  god.  As  this 
voice  gave  expression  to  the  will  of  the  supreme  deity,  and 
consequently  of  the  highest  good  ;  and  as  this  will  was  ex- 
pressed in  the  form  of  laws;  hence  again  the  Roman  maxim, 
"  What  the  law  says  is  right." 

It  is  very  evident  that  in  such  a  system  there  was  no 
place  for  individuality.  The  State  was  everything,  and  the 
majority  was  in  fact  the  State.  What  the  majority  said 
should  be,  that  was  the  voice  of  the  State,  that  was  the  voice 
of  God,  that  was  the  expression  of  the  highest  good,  that 
was  the  expression  of  the  highest  conception  of  right ; —  and 
everybody  must  assent  to  that  or  be  considered  a  traitor  to 
the  State.  The  individual  was  but  a  part  of  the  State. 


3  (Rioted  in  Neander's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Section 
First,  div.  3,  par.  2. 


ARCH   OF  AUGUSTUS. 


RIGHTS   OF  INDIVIDUAL   CONSCIENCE.  .143 

There  was  therefore  no  such  thing  as  the  rights  of  the  people  ; 
the  right  of  the  State  only  was  to  be  considered,  and'  that 
was  to  be  considered  absolute.  "The  first  principle  of  their 
law  was  the  paramount  right  of  the  State  over  the  citizen. 
Whether  as  head  of  a  family,  or  as  proprietor,  he  had  no 
natural  rights  of  his  own  ;  his  privileges  were  created  by  the 
law  as  well  as  defined  by  it.  The  State  in  the  plenitude  of 
her  power,  delegated  a  portion  of  her  own  irresponsibility 
to  the  citizen,  who  satisfied  the  conditions  she  required,  in 
order  to  become  the  parent  of  her  children  ;  but  at  the  same 
time  she  demanded  of  him  the  sacrifice  of  his  free  agency  to 
her  own  rude  ideas  of  political  expediency." — MerivaleS 

It  is  also  evident  that  in  such  a  system,  there  was  no 
such  thing  as  the  rights  of  conscience  ;  because  as  the  State 
was  supreme  also  in  the  realm  of  religion,  all  things  relig- 
ious were  to  be  subordinated  to  the  will  of  the  State,  which 
was  but  the  will  of  the  majority.  And  where  the  majority 
presumes  to  decide  in  matters  of  religion,  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  rights  of  religion  or  conscience.  Against  this  whole 
system  Christianity  was  diametrically  opposed, — 

First,  In  its  assertion  of  the  supremacy  of  God  ;  in  the 
idea  of  God  as  manifested  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  highest 
idea  of  good  ;  in  the  will  of  God  as  expressed  in  his  law  as 
the  highest  conception  of  right ;  and  in  the  fear  of  God 
and  the  keeping  of  his  commandments  as  the  whole  duty  of 
man.  Christ  had  set  himself  before  his  disciples  as  the 
one  possessing  all  power  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  He  had 
told  them  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  teach  to  every 
creature  all  things  whatsoever  he  had  commanded  them. 
Christ  had  said  that  the  first  of  all  the  commandments,  that 
which  inculcates  the  highest  and  first  of  all  duties,  is  "Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all 
thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  with  all  thy  strength." 
This  put  Jesus  Christ  above  the  State,  and  put  allegiance  to 
him  above  allegiance  to  the  State  ;  this  denied  the  suprem- 

4  "  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxii,  par.  21. 


14:4:         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  UMPIRE. 

acy  of  Rome,  and  likewise  denied  that  either  the  Roman 
gods  were  gods  at  all,  or  that  the  genius  of  Rome  itself  was 
in  any  sense  a  god. 

Secondly,  When  the  republic  as  represented  by  the  Sen- 
ate and  people  of  Rome  was  merged  in  the  imperial  power, 
and  the  emperor  became  the  embodiment  of  the  State,  he 
represented  the  dignity,  the  majesty,  and  the  power  of  the 
State,  and  likewise,  in  that,  represented  the  divinity  of  the 
State.  Hence  divinity  attached  to  the  Caesars. 

Christianity  was  directly  opposed  to  this,  as  shown  by 
the  word  of  Christ,  who,  when  asked  by  the  Pharisees  and 
the  Herodians  whether  it  was  lawful  to  give  tribute  to 
Caesar  or  not,  answered:  "Render  therefore  unto  Caesar 
the  things  which  are  Caesar's  ;  and  unto  God  the  things  that 
are  God's."  In  this  Christ  established  a  clear  distinction 
between  Caesar  and  God,  and  between  religion  and  the  State. 
He  separated  that  which  pertains  to  God  from  that  which  per- 
tains to  the  State.  Only  that  which  was  Caesar's  was  to  be 
rendered  to  Caesar,  while  that  which  is  God's  was  to  be 
rendered  to  God  and  with  no  reference  whatever  to  Caesar. 

The  State  being  divine  and  the  Caesar  reflecting  this  di- 
vinity, whatever  was  God's  was  Caesar's.  Therefore  when 
Christ  made  this  distinction  between  God  and  Caesar,  sep- 
arated that  which  pertains  to  God  from  that  which  per- 
tains to  Caesar,  and  commanded  men  to  render  to  God  that 
which  is  God's,  and  to  Caesar  only  that  which  is  Caesar's,  he 
at  once  stripped  Caesar  —  the  State  —  of  every  attribute  of 
divinity.  And  in  doing  this  he  declared  the  supremacy  of 
the  individual  conscience  /  because  it  is  left  with  the  individ- 
ual to  decide  what  things  they  are  which  pertain  to  God. 

Thus  Christianity  proclaimed  the  right  of  the  individual 
to  worship  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience, 
while  Rome  asserted  the  duty  of  every  man  to  worship  ac- 
cording to  the  dictates  of  the  State.  Christianity  asserted 
the  supremacy  of  God  ;  Rome  asserted  the  supremacy  of  the 
State.  Christianity  set  forth  God  as  manifested  in  Jesus 


CHRISTIANS  SUBJECT   TO   CIVIL  AUTHORITY.     145 

Christ  as  the  chief  good  ;  Rome  held  the  State  to  be  the 
highest  good.  Christianity  set  forth  the  law  of  God  as  the 
expression  of  the  highest  conception  of  right ;  Rome  held 
the  law  of  the  State  to  be  the  expression  of  the  highest  idea 
of  right.  Christianity  taught  that  the  fear  of  God  and  the 
keeping  of  his  commandments  is  the  whole  duty  of  man  ; 
Rome  taught  that  to  be  the  obedient  servant  of  the  State  is 
the  whole  duty  of  man.  Christianity  preached  Christ  as  the 
sole  possessor  of  power  in  heaven  and  in  earth  ;  Rome  as- 
serted the  State  to  be  the  highest  power.  Christianity  sep- 
arated that  which  is  God's  from  that  which  is  Caesar's  ; 
Rome  maintained  that  that  which  is  God's  is  Caesar's. 

This  was  the  contest,  and  these  were  the  reasons  of  it, 
between  Christianity  and  the  Roman  empire. 

Yet  in  all  this  Christianity  did  not  deny  to  Caesar  a  place  ; 
it  did  not  propose  to  undo  the  State.  It  only  taught  the 
State  its  proper  place  ;  and  proposed  to  have  the  State  take 
that  place  and  keep  it.  Christianity  did  not  dispute  the 
right  of  the  Roman  State  to  be  ;  it  only  denied  the  right  of 
that  State  to  be  in  the  place  of  God.  In  the  very  words  in 
which  he  separated  between  that  which  is  Caesar's  and  that 
which  is  God's,  Christ  recognized  the  rightfulness  of  Caesar 
to  be ;  and  that  there  were  things  that  rightfully  belong  to 
Caesar,  and  which  were  to  be  rendered  to  him  by  Christians. 
He  said,  "Render  therefore  to  Caesar  the  things  that  are 
Caesar's."  In  these  words  he  certainly  recognized  that 
Caesar  had  jurisdiction  in  certain  things,  and  that  within 
that  jurisdiction  he  was  to  be  respected.  As  Caesar  repre- 
sented the  State,  in  this  scripture  the  phrase  represents  the 
State,  whether  it  be  the  State  of  Rome  or  any  other  State  on 
earth.  This  is  simply  the  statement  of  the  right  of  civil 
government  to  be  ;  that  there  are  certain  things  over  which 
civil  government  has  jurisdiction  ;  and  that  in  these  things 
the  authority  of  civil  government  is  to  be  respected. 

This  jurisdiction  is  more  clearly  defined  in  Paul's  letter  to 
the  Romans,  chap,  xiii,  1-10.  There  it  is  commanded,  "  Let 


146         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

every  soul  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers."  In  this  is 
asserted  the  right  of  the  higher  powers  —  that  is,  the  right 
of  the  State  —  to  exercise  authority,  and  that  Christians  must 
be  subject  to  that  authority.  Further  it  is  given  as  a  reason 
for  this,  that  "there  is  no  power  but  of  God:  the  powers 
that  be  are  ordained  of  God."  This  not  only  asserts  the 
right  of  the  State  to  be  and  to  exercise  authority,  but  it  also 
asserts  the  truth  that  the  State  is  an  ordinance  of  God,  and 
the  power  which  it  exercises  is  ordained  of  God.  Yet  in  this 
very  assertion  Christianity  was  held  to  be  antagonistic  to 
Rome,  because  it  put  the  God  of  the  Christians  above  the 
Roman  State,  and  made  the  State  to  be  only  an  ordinance 
of  the  God  of  the  Christians.  For  the  Roman  empire,  or 
for  any  of  the  Roman  emperors,  to  have  recognized  the  truth 
of  this  statement  would  have  been  at  once  to  revolutionize 
the  whole  system  of  civil  and  religious  economy  of  the 
Romans,  and  to  deny  at  once  the  value  of  the  accumulated 
wisdom  of  all  the  generations  of  the  Roman  ages.  Yet  that 
was  the  only  proper  alternative  of  the  Roman  State,  and 
that  is  what  ought  to  have  been  done. 

Civil  government  being  thus  declared  to  be  of  God,  and 
its  authority  ordained  of  God,  the  instruction  proceeds : 
"  Whosoever  therefore  resisteth  the  power,  resisteth  the  or- 
dinance of  God  :  and  they  that  resist  shall  receive  to  them- 
selves damnation.  .  .  .  Wherefore  ye  must  needs  be  subject, 
not  only  for  wrath,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake."  Govern- 
ments being  of  God,  and  their  authority  being  ordained  of 
God,  Christians  in  respecting  God  will  necessarily  respect  in 
its  place,  the  exercise  of  the  authority  ordained  by  him  ;  Imt 
this  authority,  according  to  the  words  of  Christ,  is  to  be 
exercised  only  in  those  things  which  are  .  Caesar's  and  not  in 
things  which  pertain  to  God.  Accordingly,  the  letter  to  the 
Romans  proceeds,  "For  this  cause  pay  ye  tribute  also  ;  for 
they  are  God's  ministers,  attending  continually  upon  this 
very  thing."  This  connects  Paul's  argument  directly  with 
that  of  Christ  above  referred  to,  and  shows  that  this  is  but  a 


THE  LIMITS   OF  STATE  JURISDICTION.  147 

comment  on  that  statement,  and  an  extension  of  the  argu- 
ment therein  contained. 

The  scripture  proceeds:  "Render  therefore  to  all  their 
dues  :  tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due  ;  custom  to  whom  cus- 
tom ;  fear  to  whom  fear  ;  honor  to  whom  honor.  Owe  no 
man  anything,  but  to  love  one  another  ;  for  he  that  loveth 
another  hath  fulfilled  the  law.  For  this,  Thou  shalt  not 
commit  adultery,  Thou  shalt  not  kill,  Thou  shalt  not  steal, 
Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness,  Thou  shalt  not  covet ; 
and  if  there  be  any  other  commandment,  it  is  briefly  com- 
prehended in  this  saying,  namely,  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself." 

Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  apostle  is  here  writing 
to  Christians  concerning  the  respect  and  duty  which  they  are 
to  render  to  the  powers  that  be,  that  is,  to  the  State  in  fact. 
He  knew  full  well,  and  so  did  those  to  whom  he  wrote,  that 
there  are  other  commandments  in  the  very  law  of  which  a 
part  is  here  quoted.  But  he  and  they  likewise  knew  that 
these  other  commandments  do  not  in  any  way  relate  to  any 
man's  duty  or  respect  to  the  powers  that  be.  Those  other 
commandments  of  the  law  which  is  here  p.artly  quoted,  re- 
late to  God  and  to  man's  duty  to  him.  One  of  them  is, 
"Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  before  me;"  another, 
"Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee  any  graven  image,"  etc.; 
another,  "Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy 
God  in  vain  ;"  and  another,  "Remember  the  Sabbath  day 
to  keep  it  holy  ;  six  days  shalt  thou  labor  and  do  all  thy 
work,  but  the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy 
'God,"  etc.:  and  these  are  briefly  comprehended  in  that  say- 
ing, namely,  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all 
thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind,  and 
with  all  thy  strength."  According  to  the  words  of  Christ, 
all  these  obligations,  pertaining  solely  to  God,  are  to  be 
rendered  to  him  only,  and  with  man  in  this  realm,  Caesar 
can  never  of  right  have  anything  to  do  in  any  way  what- 
ever. 

14 


148         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

As,  therefore,  the  instruction  in  Romans  xiii,  1-10  is 
given  to  Christians  concerning  their  duty  and  respect  to 
the  powers  that  be  ;  and  as  this  instruction  is  confined  abso- 
lutely to  man's  relationship  to  his  fellow-men,  it  is  evident 
that  when  Christians  have  paid  their  taxes,  and  have  shown 
proper  respect  to  their  fellow-men,  then  their  obligation, 
their  duty,  arid  their  respect,  to  the  powers  that  le,  have 
been  fully  discharged,  and  those  powers  never  can  rightly 
have  any  further  jurisdiction  over  their  conduct.  This  is  not 
to  say  that  the  State  has  jurisdiction  of  the  last  six  command- 
ments as  such.  It  is  only  to  say  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
State  is  confined  solely  to  man's  conduct  toward  man,  and 
never  can  touch  his  relationship  to  God,  even  under  the  sec- 
ond table  of  the  law.  This  will  be  more  fully  discussed  in  a 
subsequent  chapter. 

This  doctrine  asserts  the  right  of  every  man  to  worship 
according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience,  as  he  pleases, 
and  when  he  pleases.  Just  this,  however,  was  the  subject 
of  the  whole  controversy  between  Christianity  and  the  Ro- 
man empire.  There  was  never  any  honest  charge  made 
that  the  Christians  did  violence  to  any  man,  or  refused  to 
pay  tribute.  The  direct  and  positive  instruction  was  not 
only  that  they  should  do  no  evil,  but  that  they  should  speak 
no  evil  of  any  man  ;  and  that  they  practiced  accordingly  is 
shown  by  Pliny's  letter  to  Trajan  concerning  the  Christians, 
in  which  he  says  that  when  they  met  and  partook  of  that 
harmless  meal,  before  they  separated  they  pledged  one 
another  not  to  steal,  not  to  commit  adultery,  not  to  do  vio- 
lence to  any  man.  The  Roman  State  never  had  any  just 
charge  to  bring  against  the  Christians  in  any  of  these  re- 
spects. The  charge  was  atheism,  because  they  denied  the 
gods,  and  high  treason,  because  they  denied  the  right  of  the 
State  to  rule  in  things  pertaining  to  God.  Therefore  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact  the  whole  controversy  between  Christianity  and 
the  Roman  empire  was  upon  the  simple  question  of  the  rights 
of  conscience, —  the  question  whether  it  is  the  right  of  every 


THE  ROMAN  RELIGION.  149 

man  to  worship  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  con- 
science, or  whether  it  is  his  duty  to  worship  according  to 
the  dictates  of  the  State. 

This  question  was  then  as  it  always  has  been,  very  far- 
reaching.  When  the  right  was  claimed  to  worship  accord- 
ing to  the  dictates  of  conscience,  in  that  was  claimed  the 
right  to  disregard  all  the  Roman  laws  on  the  subject  of 
religion,  and  to  deny  the  right  of  the  State  to  have  anything 
whatever  to  do  with  the  question  of  religion.  But  this, 
according  to  the  Roman  estimate,  was  only  to  bid  defiance 
to  the  State  and  to  the  interests  of  society  altogether.  The 
Roman  State,  so  intimately  and  intricately  connected  with 
religion,  was  but  the  reflection  of  the  character  of  the  Roman 
people,  who  prided  themselves  upon  being  the  most  religious 
of  all  nations,  and  Cicero  commended  them  for  this,  because 
their  religion  was  carried  into  all  the  details  of  life.  "The 
Roman  ceremonial  worship  was  very  elaborate  and  minute, 
applying  to  every  part  of  daily  life.  It  consisted  in  sacri- 
fices, prayers,  festivals,  and  the  investigations,  by  auguries 
and  haruspices,  of  the  will  of  the  gods  and  the  course  of 
future  events.  The  Romans  accounted  themselves  an  ex- 
ceedingly religious  people,  because  their  religion  was  so 
intimately  connected  with  the  affairs  of  home  and  State. 
.  .  .  Thus  religion  everywhere  met  the  public  life  of  the 
Roman  by  its  festivals,  and  laid  an  equal  yoke  on  his  private 
life  by  its  requisition  of  sacrifices,  prayers,  and  auguries. 
All  pursuits  must  be  conducted  according  to  a  system  care- 
fully laid  down  by  the  College  of  Pontiffs.  ...  If  a  man 
went  out  to  walk,  there  was  a  form  to  be  recited ;  if  he 
mounted  his  chariot,  another." — James  Freeman  Clarke.6 

But  this  whole  system  of  religion  was  false.  The  gods 
which  they  worshiped  were  false  gods.  Their  gods,  in 
short,  were  but  reflections  of  themselves,  and  the  ceremonies 
of  worship  were  but  the  exercise  of  their  own  passions  and 
lusts.  Neither  in  their  gods  nor  their  worship  was  there  a 
single  element  of  good.  Therefore  upon  it  all  Christianity 

6  "  Ten  Great  Religions,"  chap,  vii,  sec.  iii,  par.  1,  4. 


150         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

taught  the  people  to  turn  their  backs.  The  Christian  doc- 
trine declared  all  these  gods  to  be  no  gods,  and  all  the  forms 
of  worship  of  the  gods  to  be  only  idolatry,  and  a  denial  of 
the  only  true  God  —  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

The  games  and  all  the  festival  days  were  affairs  of 
state,  and  ' '  were  an  essential  part  of  the  cheerful  devotion 
of  the  pagans,  and  the  gods  were  supposed  to  accept,  as  the 
most  grateful  offering,  the  games  that  the  prince  and  people 
celebrated  in  honor  of  their  peculiar  festivals." — Gibbon* 

The  festivities  of  the  wedding  and  the  ceremonies  of  the 
funeral  were  all  conducted  under  the  protection  of  the  gods. 
More  than  this,  ' '  the  number  of  the  gods  was  as  great  as 
the  number  of  the  incidents  in  earthly  life." — Mommsen."1 
The  "pagan's  domestic  hearth  was  guarded  by  the  penates, 
or  by  the  ancestral  gods  of  his  family  or  tribe.  By  land 
he  traveled  under  the  protection  of  one  tutelar  divinity, 
by  sea  of  another ;  the  birth,  the  bridal,  the  funeral,  had 
each  its  presiding  deity ;  the  very  commonest  household 
utensils  and  implements  were  cast  in  mythological  forms ; 
he  could  scarcely  drink  without  being  reminded  of  mak- 
ing a  libation  to  the  gods." — Milman*  All  this  heathen 
ceremony  Christianity  taught  the  people  to  renounce,  and 
every  one  did  renounce  it  who  became  a  Christian.  But  so 
intricately  was  the  idolatry  interwoven  into  all  the  associa- 
tions of  both  public  and  private  life,  of  both  State  and  social 
action,  that  "it  seemed  impossible  to  escape  the  observance 
of  them  without  at  the  same  time  renouncing  the  commerce 
of  mankind  and  all  the  offices  and  amusements  of  society." 
Yet  with  any  of  it  true  Christianity  did  not  compromise. 

Every  Christian,  merely  by  the  profession  of  Christianity, 
severed  himself  from  all  the  gods  of  Rome  and  everything 

6  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xv,  par.  15. 

7 "  History  of  Rome,"  book  i,  chap,  xii,  par.  22. 

8"  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chaf.  Ill,  par.  2. 


THE  ROMAN  LAWS.  151 

that  was  done  in  their  honor.  He  could  not  attend  a  wed- 
ding or  a  funeral  of  his  nearest  relatives,  because  every  cere- 
mony was  performed  with  reference  to  the  gods.  He  could 
not  attend  the  public  festival,  for  the  same  reason.  Nor 
could  he  escape  by  absenting  himself  on  such  occasions, 
because  on  days  of  public  festivity,  the  doors  of  the  houses, 
and  the  lamps  about  them,  and  the  heads  of  the  dwellers 
therein,  must  all  be  adorned  with  laurel  and  garlands  of 
flowers  in  honor  of  the  licentious  gods  and  goddesses  of 
Rome.  If  the  Christian  took  part  in  these  services,  he  paid 
honor  to  the  gods  as  did  the  other  heathen.  If  he  refused 
to  do  so,  which  he  must  do  if  he  would  obey  God  and  honor 
Christ,  he  made  himself  conspicuous  before  the  eyes  of  the 
people,  all  of  whom  were  intensely  jealous  of  the  respect 
they  thought  due  to  the  gods  ;  and  also  in  so  refusing  the 
Christians  disobeyed  the  Roman  law  which  commanded 
these  things  to  be  done. 

All  this  subjected  the  Christian  to  universal  hatred,  and 
as  the  laws  positively  forbade  everything  that  the  Christians 
taught  both  with  reference  to  the  gods  and  to  the  State,  the 
forms  of  law  furnished  a  ready  channel  through  which  this 
hatred  found  vent.  This  was  the  open  way  for  the  fury  of 
the  populace  to  spend  itself  upon  the  "  deniers  of  the  gods, 
and  enemies  of  the  Csesars  and  of  the  Roman  people  ;  "  and 
this  was  the  source  of  the  persecution  of  Christianity  by 
pagan  Rome. 

Before  Christ  was  born  into  the  world,  Maecenas,  one  of 
the  two  chief  ministers  of  Augustus,  had  given  to  that  first 
of  Roman  emperors  the  following  counsel,  as  embodying 
the  principle  which  should  characterize  the  imperial  govern- 
ment :  — 

"Worship  the  gods  in  all  respects  according  to  the  laws  of  your 
country,  and  compel  all  others  to  do  the  same  ;  but  hate  and  punish 
those  who  would  introduce  anything  whatever,  alien  to  our  customs  in 
this  particular  ;  not  alone  for  the  sake  of  the  gods,  because  whoever  de- 


152         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

spises  them  is  incapable  of  reveren'ce  for  anything  else  ;  but  because 
such  persons,  by  introducing  new  divinities,  mislead  many  to  adopt  also 
foreign  laws. "  9 

The  Christians  did  refuse  to  worship  the  gods  according 
to  the  laws,  or  in  any  other,  way  ;  they  did  introduce  that 
which  was  pre-eminently  alien  to  all  the  Roman  customs  in 
this  particular  ;  they  did  despise  the  gods.  In  the  presence 
of  the  purity,  the  goodness,  and  the  inherent  holiness  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Christians  could  have  no  other  feeling 
than  that  of  abhorrence  for  the  wicked,  cruel,  and  licentious 
gods  of  the  heathen.  And  when  from  love  for  Christ  they 
shrank  in  abhorrence  from  this  idolatry,  it  only  excited  to 
bitter  hatred  the  lovers  of  the  licentious  worship  of  the  in- 
sensate gods  ;  and,  as  above  stated,  there  was  the  law,  and 
there  the  machinery  of  the  State,  ready  to  be  used  in  giving 
force  to  the  religious  enmity  thus  excited. 

One  of  the  ruling  principles  of  law  in  the  Roman  State 
was  this  :  — 

"Whoever  introduces  new  religions,  the  tendency  and  character  of 
which  are  unknown,  whereby  the  minds  of  men  may  be  disturbed, 
shall,  if  belonging  to  the  higher  rank,  be  banished  ;  if  to  the  lower, 
punished  with  death."10 

Nothing  could  be  more  directly  condemned  by  this  law 
than  was  Christianity. 

1.  It  was  wholly  a  new  religion,  one  never  before  heard 
of ;  it  was  not  in  any  sense  a  national  religion,  but  was  ever 
announced   as   that  which  should  be  universal.     Being  so 
entirely  new,   in  the  nature  of  the  case  its  tendency   and 
character  were  unknown  to  the  Roman  mind. 

2.  Of  all  religions  the  world  has  ever  known,  Christianity 
appeals  most  directly  to  the  minds  of  men.     The  first  of  all 
the  commandments  demanding  the  obedience   of   men   de- 


9  Neander's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  i,  Section 
First,  part  i,  div.  iii,  par.  2. 
10  Id. 


SOURCES  OF  PERSECUTION.  153 

clares,  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
heart,  and  with  all  thy  mind."  The  law  of  God  was  set 
forth  as  the  highest  conception  of  right,  and  the  letter  to  all 
the  Christians  in  Rome  said,  "With  the  mind  I  myself  serve 
the  law  of  God."  Rom.  vii,  25.  Again  that  same  letter 
said,  "Be  not  conformed  to  this  world:  but  be  ye  trans- 
formed Jy  the  renewing  of  your  mind."  Chap,  xii,  2.  Again 
and  again  in  the  Christian  writings  this  same  idea  was  set 
forth,  and  it  was  all  summed  up  in  the  saying  of  Christ  to 
the  woman  of  Samaria,  "God  is  a  Spirit:  and  they  that 
worship  him  must  worship  him  in  spirit ; "  thus  setting  God 
before  the  mind  to  be  discerned  only  by  the  mind,  and 
worshiped  in  a  mental  and  spiritual  conception  only. 

3.  The  Christians  were  almost  wholly  from  the  lower 
ranks.  The  common  people  heard  Christ  gladly  ;  so  also 
did  they  hear  his  gracious  gospel  from  his  disciples.  There 
was  yet  a  further  disadvantage,  however,  in  the  position  of 
the  Christians.  Christianity  had  sprung  from  among  the 
Jews.  It  had  been  despised  by  the  Jews.  The  Jews  were 
viewed  by  the  Romans  as  the  most  despicable  of  all  people. 
Therefore,  as  the  Christians  were  despised  by  the  Jews, 
who  were  despised  by  the  Romans,  it  followed  that  to  the 
Romans  the  Christians  were  the  despised  of  the  despised. 
It  was  but  the  record  of  a  literal  fact  which  Paul  wrote : 
"We  are  made  as  the  filth  of  the  world,  and  are  the  off- 
scouring  of  all  things  unto  this  day."  1  Cor.  iv,  13.  The 
law  declared  that  if  those  who  did  what  the  statute  forbade 
belonged  to  the  lower  ranks,  they  were  to  be  punished  with 
death  ;  and  as  the  Christians  were  mostly  from  the  lower 
ranks,  death  became  the  most  common  penalty  incurred  by 
the  profession  of  Christianity. 

There  was  yet  another  disadvantage.  These  laws  had 
all  been  framed,  and  the  system  had  been  established,  long 
before  there  were  any  Christians  in  the  world.  Therefore 
the  teaching  of  the  Christians,  their  practice,  and  their  disre- 
gard of  the  Roman  laws,  appeared  to  the  Romans  in  no 


154         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

other  light  than  as  an  open  insurrection  against  the  govern- 
ment, and  an  attempt  at  the  dissolution  of  society  itself. 

The  persecution  of  the  Christians,  having  its  foundation 
principle  in  the  system  of  laws  and  government  of  Rome, 
proceeded  from  four  distinct  causes  and  from  four  distinct 
sources. 

First,  from  the  populace.  The  Christians  refused  to  pay 
any  respect  or  honor  whatever  to  the  gods  to  whom  the 
people  were  devoted  in  every  act  and  relationship  of  life. 
They  were  charged  at  once  with  being  atheists  and  enemies 
of  the  gods,  and  therefore  of  being  the  direct  cause  of  all 
the  calamities  and  misfortunes  that  might  befall  anybody 
from  any  source.  Everything  in  nature,  as  well  as  in  the 
life  of  the  individual,  was  presided  over  by  some  particular 
deity,  and  therefore  whatever,  out  of  the  natural  order, 
might  happen  in  the  course  of  the  seasons  or  in  the  life  of 
the  individual,  was  held  to  be  a  token  of  the  anger  of  the 
insulted  gods,  which  was  only  to  be  appeased  by  the  punish- 
ment of  the  Christians. 

If  the  fall  of  rain  was  long  delayed  so  that  crops  and 
pastures  suffered,  it  was  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  Christians. 
If  when  rain  did  come,  there  was  too  much  so  that  the  rivers 
overflowed  and  did  damage,  they  charged  this  likewise  to 
the  Christians.  If  there  was  an  earthquake  or  a  famine,  the 
Christians'  disrespect  to  the  gods  was  held  to  be  the  cause 
of  it.  If  an  epidemic  broke  out,  if  there  was  an  invasion  by 
the  barbarians,  or  if  any  public  calamity  occurred,  it  was 
all  attributed  to  the  anger  of  the  gods,  which  was  visited 
upon  the  State  and  the  people  on  account  of  the  spread  of 
Christianity.  For  instance ;  Esculapius  was  the  god  of 
healing,  and  as  late  as  the  time  of  Diocletian,  when  a  plague 
had  spread  far  through  the  empire  and  continued  a  long 
time,  Porphyry,  who  made  strong  pretensions  to  being  a 
philosopher,  actually  argued  that  the  reason  why  the  plague 
could  not  be  checked  was  that  the  spread  of  Christianity  had 
destroyed  the  influence  of  Esculapius.  When  such  things 


SUPERSTITION  AND   SELFISHNESS.  155 

as  this  were  soberly  announced  as  the  opinion  of  the  wise,  it 
can  readily  be  understood  how  strong  a  hold  the  same  super- 
stition had  upon  the  minds  of  the  common  heathen. 

The  turning  away  of  individuals  from  the  worship  of  the 
gods  and  their  renouncing  all  respect  for  them,  and  holding 
as  idolaters  only,  those  who  would  show  respect  to  them, 
excited  the  most  bitter  feelings  in  the  great  mass  of  the 
people.  When  there  was  added  to  this  the  calamities  and 
misfortunes  that  might  befall,  which  were  held  to  be  but  a 
manifestation  of  the  anger  of  the  gods,  and  their  sympathy 
with  the  people  in  their  antagonism  to  Christianity, —  all 
these  things  tended  only  to  deepen  that  feeling  of  bitterness 
and  to  inspire  the  populace  with  the  idea  that  they  were 
doing  the  will  of  the  gods,  and  performing  the  most  accept- 
able service,  when  they  executed  vengeance  upon  the  offend- 
ing Christians.  And  "when  superstition  has  once  found 
out  victims,  to  whose  guilt  or  impiety  it  may  ascribe  the 
divine  anger,  human  revenge  mingles  itself  with  the  relent- 
less determination  to  propitiate  offended  heaven,  and  con- 
tributes still  more  to  blind  the  judgment  and  exasperate  the 
passions. " — \Milman. n 

JSTor  was  this  resentment  always  confined  to  respect  for 
the  gods,  but  often  private  spite  and  personal  animosities 
were  indulged  under  cover  of  allegiance  to  the  gods  and 
respect  to  the  laws.  This  was  shown  not  only  by  prosecu- 
tion before  the  magistrates,  but  by  open  riot  and  mob 
violence  ;  and  there  was  no  lack  of  individuals  to  work  upon 
the  riotous  propensities  of  the  superstitiously  enraged  people. 
For  instance,  one  Alexander  of  Abonoteichus,  a  magician, 
when  he  found  that  his  tricks  failed  to  excite  the  wonder  that 
he  desired,  declared  that  the  Pontus  was  filled  with  atheists 
and  Christians,  and  called  on  the  people  to  stone  them  if 
they  did  not  want  to  draw  down  on  themselves  the  anger  of 
the  gods.  He  went  so  far  at  last  as  never  to  attempt  to  give 
an  exhibition  until  he  had  first  proclaimed,  "If  any  atheist, 
11 "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  27. 


156         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

Christian,  or  Epicurean  has  slipped  in  here  as  a  spy,  let  him 
be  gone." 

The  second  source  from  which  proceeded  the  persecution 
of  the  Christians  was  the  priests  and  artisans.  The  priests 
had  charge  of  the  temples  and  sacrifices,  by  which  they  re- 
ceived their  living  and  considerable  profit  besides.  Pliny's 
testimony,  before  quoted,  plainly  says  that  in  his  province 
"the  temples  were  almost  forsaken,"  and  of  the  sacrifices 
"very  few  purchasers  had  of  late  appeared."  The  influence 
of  Christianity  reached  much  farther  than  to  those  who 
openly  professed  it.  Many,  seeing  the  Christians  openly  for- 
saking the  gods,  and  refusing  to  offer  sacrifices,  would  like- 
wise, merely  upon  economical  principles,  stop  making  sacri- 
fices in  the  temples.  The  priests  and  the  traffickers  in  sacri- 
ficial offerings,  seeing  their  gains  falling  off,  were  not  slow  in 
charging  to  the  Christians  the  delinquency,  were  prompt  to 
prosecute  them  before  the  tribunals,  and  were  very  diligent 
to  secure  the  most  rigid  enforcement  of  the  laws  command- 
ing sacrifice  to  the  gods.  From  the  same  cause  the  artisans 
found  their  gains  vanishing,  through  the  diminished  sale  of 
carved  and  engraved  images,  amulets,  etc.  Upon  which, 
like  that  Demetrius  of  the  Scriptures  who  made  silver 
shrines  for  Diana  (Acts  xix,  21-29),  .they  became  very  zeal- 
ous for  the  honor  of  the  gods,  and  raised  persecution 
against  the  disciples  in  order  to  restore  the  worship  of  the 
gods  —  and  their  own  accustomed  income. 

A  third  source  from  which  persecution  arose  was  the 
governors  of  provinces.  Some  of  these  were  of  cruel  and 
splenetic  disposition,  and,  holding  a  personal  animosity 
against  the  Christians,  were  glad  of  the  opportunity  to  be 
the  ministers  of  such  laws  as  were  of  force  against  them. 
Others  who  were  totally  indifferent  to  the  merits  of  the 
question,  yet  who  earnestly  desired  to  be  popular,  were 
ready  to  take  part  with  the  people  in  their  fanatical  rage, 
and  to  lend  their  power  and  use  their  official  influence 
against  the  Christians.  Yet  others  who  had  no  particular 


THE   GOVERNORS   OF  PROVINCES. 

care  for  the  worship  of  the  gods,  could  not  understand  the 
Christians'  refusal  to  obey  the  laws. 

The  governors  could  see  nothing  in  such  a  refusal  to 
obey  the  law  and  perform  the  ceremonies  therein  prescribed, 
but  what  appeared  to  them  to  be  blind,  willful  obstinacy 
and  downright  stubbornness.  They  regarded  such  willful 
disobedience  to  the  law  to  be  much  more  worthy  of  condem- 
nation than  even  the  disrespect  to  the  gods.  Such  a  one 
was  Pliny,  who  said,  ' '  Let  their  confessions  be  of  any  sort 
whatever,  this  positiveness  in  inflexible  obstinacy  deserved 
to  be  punished."  Many  of  the  governors  "would  sooner 
pardon  in  the  Christians  their  defection  from  the  worship  of 
the  gods,  than  their  want  of  reverence  for  the  emperors,  in 
declining  to  take  any  part  in  those  idolatrous  demonstrations 
of  homage  which  pagan  flattery  had  invented,  such  as 
sprinkling  their  images  with  incense,  and  swearing  by  their 
genius. " — Necmder. 12 

Still  others  were  disposed  to  be  favorable  to  the  Chris- 
tians, to  sympathize  with  them  in  their  difficult  positions, 
and  to  temper  as  far  as  possible  the  severity  of  the  laws 
against  them.  And  when  the  Christians  were  prosecuted 
before  their  tribunals,  they  would  make  personal  appeals  to 
induce  them  to  make  some  concession,  however  slight,  that 
would  justify  the  governor  in  certifying  that  they  had  con- 
formed to  the  law,  so  that  he  might  release  them, —  not  only 
from  that  particular  accusation,  but  from  any  other  that 
might  be  made. 

Such  governors  would  plead  with  the  Christians  to  this 
effect,  "I  do  not  wish  to  see  you  suffer  ;  I  know  you  have 
done  no  real  harm,  but  there  stands  the  law.  I  am  here  as 
the  representative  of  the  empire  to  see  that  the  laws  are 
enforced.  I  have  no  personal  interest  whatever  in  this 
matter  ;  therefore  I  ask  you  for  my  own  sake  that  you  will 
do  some  honor  to  the  gods,  however  slight,  whereby  I  may 
be  relieved  from  executing  this  penalty  and  causing  you  to 
suffer.  All  that  is  required  is  that  you  shall  worship  the 

12  Id.,  par.  5. 


158         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

gods.  Now  your  God  is  one  of  the  gods  ;  therefore  what 
harm  is  there  in  obeying  the  law  which  commands  to  worship 
the  gods  without  reference  to  any  particular  one  ?  Why  not 
say,  'The  Emperor  our  lord,'  and  sprinkle  a  bit  of  incense 
toward  his  image  ?  Merely  do  either  of  these  two  simple 
things,  then  I  can  certify  that  you  have  conformed  to  the 
law,  and  release  you  from  this  and  all  future  prosecutions  of 
the  kind. " 

When  the  Christian  replied  that  he  could  not  under  any 
form  or  pretense  whatever  worship  any  other  God  than  the 
Father  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  nor  honor  any  other  by 
any  manner  of  offering  ;  nor  call  the  emperor  lord  in  the 
meaning  of  the  statute,  then  the  governor,  understanding 
nothing  of  what  the  Christian  called  conscience,  and  seeing 
all  of  what  he  considered  the  kindest  possible  offers  counted 
not  only  as  of  no  worth  but  even  as  a  reproach,  his  proffered 
mercy  was  often  turned  into  wrath.  He  considered  such 
a  refusal  only  an  evidence  of  open  ingratitude  and  obsti- 
nacy, and  that  therefore  such  a  person  was  unworthy  of 
the  slightest  consideration.  He  held  it  then  to  be  only  a 
proper  regard  for  both  the  gods  and  the  State  to  execute  to 
the  utmost  the  penalty  which  the  law  prescribed. 

Another  thing  that  made  the  action  of  the  Christians 
more  obnoxious  to  the  Roman  magistrates,  was  not  only 
their  persistent  disregard  for  the  laws  touching  religion, 
but  their  assertion  of  the  right  to  disregard  them.  And 
this  plea  seemed  the  more  impertinent  from  the  fact  that 
it  was  made  by  the  despised  of  the  despised. 

The  fourth  source  from  which  persecution  came  to  the 
Christians  was  the  emperors.  Yet  until  Christianity  had 
become  so  wide-spread  as  to  attract  the  attention  of  the 
emperor,  there  was  no  general  persecution  from  this  source. 
The  first  persecution  by  the  direct  instigation  of  the  em- 
perors was  that  inflicted  by  Nero.  With  this  exception,  the 
persecution  of  the  Christians  by  the  emperors  was  solely  as 
the  representatives  of  the  State,  to  maintain  the  authority  of 


STATE  SELF-PRESERVATION.  159 

the  State  and  the  dignity  of  her  laws  ;  and  to  preserve  the 
State  from  the  certain  ruin  which  they  supposed  to  be 
threatened  from  Christianity.  This  explains  why  it  was 
that  only  the  best  of  the  emperors  persecuted  the  Christians, 
as  such. 

In  the  emperor  was  merged  the  State.  He  alone  repre- 
sented the  divinity  of  the  Roman  State.  The  Christians' 
refusal  to  recognize  in  him  that  divinity  or  to  pay  respect  to 
it  in  any  way,  was  held  to  be  open  disrespect  to  the  State. 
The  Christians'  denial  of  the  right  of  the  State  to  make  or 
enforce  any  laws  touching  religion  or  men's  relationship  to 
God,  was  counted  as  an  undermining  of  the  authority  of 
government.  As  it  was  held  that  religion  was  essential  to 
the  very  existence  of  the  State,  and  that  the  State  for  its 
own  sake,  for  its  own  self-preservation,  must  maintain  proper 
respect  for  religion  ;  when  Christianity  denied  the  right  of 
the  State  to  exercise  any  authority  or  jurisdiction  whatever 
in  religious  things,  it  was  held  to  be  but  a  denial  of  the 
right  of  the  State  to  preserve  itself. 

Therefore  when  Christianity  had  become  quite  generally 
spread  throughout  the  empire,  it  seemed  to  such  emperors  as 
Marcus  Aurelius,  Decius,  Yalerian,  and  Diocletian  —  em- 
perors who  most  respected  Roman  institutions  —  that  the 
very  existence  of  the  empire  was  at  stake.  Consequently 
their  opposition  to  Christianity  was  but  an  effort  to  save  the 
State,  and  was  considered  by  them  as  the  most  reasonable 
and  laudable  thing  in  the  world.  And  it  was  only  as  a  mat- 
ter of  State  policy  that  they  issued  edicts  or  emphasized 
those  already  issued  for  the  suppression  of  Christianity.  In 
making  or  enforcing  laws  against  the  Christians  it  was  in- 
variably the  purpose  of  these  emperors  to  restore  and  to  pre- 
serve the  ancient  dignity  and  glory  of  the  Roman  State.  In 
an  inscription  by  Diocletian,  it  is  distinctly  charged  that  by 
Christianity  the  State  was  being  overturned,  and  his  views 
on  this  subject  are  seen  in  the  following  extract  from  one  of 
his  edicts  :  — 


160         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

"The  immortal  gods  have,  by  their  providence,  arranged  and  estab- 
lished what  is  right.  Many  wise  and  good  men  are  agreed  that  this 
should  be  maintained  unaltered.  They  ought  not  to  be  opposed.  No 
new  religion  must  presume  to  censure  the  old,  since  it  is  the  greatest  of 
crimes  to  overturn  what  has  been  once  established  by  our  ancestors,  and 
what  has  supremacy  in  the  State."18 

This  is  further  shown  by  the  following  words  from  the 
edict  of  Galerius  putting  a  stop  to  the  persecution  of  Chris- 
tianity :  — 

"  Among  other  matters  which  we  have  devised  for  the  benefit  and 
common  advantage  of  our  people,  we  have  first  determined  to  restore  all 
things  according  to  the  ancient  laws  and  the  public  institutions  of  the 
Romans.  And  to  make  provision  for  this,  that  also  the  Christians,  who 
have  left  the  religion  of  their  fathers,  should  return  again  to  a  good 
purpose  and  resolution."  13 

With  persecution  proceeding  from  these  four  sources,  it  is 
evident  that  from  the  day  that  Christ  sent  forth  his  disciples 
to  preach  the  gospel,  the  Christians  were  not  certain  of  a 
moment's  peace.  It  might  be  that  they  could  live  a  consid- 
erable length  of  time  unmolested  ;  but  yet  they  were  at  no 
time  sure  that  it  would  be  so,  because  they  were  subject  at 
all  times  to  the  spites  and  caprices  of  individuals  and  the 
populace,  and  at  any  hour  of  the  day  or  night  any  Christian 
was  liable  to  be  arrested  and  prosecuted  before  the  tribunals, 
or  to  be  made  the  butt  of  the  capricious  and  violent  temper 
of  the  heathen  populace. 

Yet  to  no  one  of  these  sources  more  than  another,  could 
be  attributed  the  guilt  or  the  dishonor  of  the  persecution, 
because  each  one  was  but  the  inevitable  fruit  of  that  system 
from  which  persecution  is  inseparable.  The  theory  which 
attaches  blame  to  the  emperors  as  the  persecutors  of  the 
Christians  is  a  mistaken  one,  because  the  emperor  was  but 
the  representative,  the  embodiment,  of  the  State  itself.  The 

12 "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  sec.  i,  div.  iii,  under 
"  Diocletian." 

13Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  viii,  chap,  xvii, 


STATE  RELIGION  MEANS  PERSECUTION.          161 

State  of  Rome  was  a  system  built  up  by  the  accumulated 
wisdom  of  all  the  Roman  ages  ;  and  to  expect  him  whose 
chief  pride  was  that  he  was  a  Roman,  and  who  was  conscious 
that  it  was  the  highest  possible  honor  to  be  a  Roman  em- 
peror —  to  expect  such  a  one  to  defer  to  the  views  of  a  new 
and  despised  sect  of  religionists  whose  doctrines  were  en- 
tirely antagonistic  to  the  entire  system  of  which  he  was  a 
representative,  would  be  to  expect  more  than  Roman  pride 
would  bear.  As  the  case  stood,  to  have  done  such  a  thing, 
would  have  been  to  make  himself  one  of  the  despised  sect, 
or  else  the  originator  of  another  one,  worthy  only,  in  the 
eyes  of  the  populace,  of  the  same  contempt  as  these.  Of 
course  we  know  now  that  the  emperors  should  have  done 
just  that  thing,  and  they  were  told  then  that  they  ought  to 
do  it,  but  the  fact  is  nevertheless  that  Roman  pride  would 
not  yield.  Nor  is  this  the  only  case  of  the  kind  in  the  his- 
tory of  Christianity. 

The  theory  that  would  make  the  governors  responsible  is 
likewise  a  mistaken  one,  because  the  governors  were  simply 
the  officers  of  the  State  set  over  a  particular  province  to 
conduct  the  affairs  of  the  government  and  to  maintain  the 
laws.  It  was  not  in  their  power  to  set  aside  the  laws, 
although  as  we  have  seen,  some  of  them  even  went  as  far 
as  possible  in  that  direction  rather  than  cause  the  Chris- 
tians to  suffer  by  enforcing  the  law. 

The  only  theory  that  will  stand  the  test  at  all  is  that 
which  places  upon  the  priests  and  the  people  the  guilt  of 
the  persecutions.  They  were  the  ones  who  did  it  from  real 
bitterness  of  the  persecuting  spirit.  And  yet  to  attach  all 
the  blame  to  these,  would  be  a  mistake,  because  it  would 
have  been  impossible  for  them  to  persecute  had  it  not  been 
for  the  system  of  government  of  which  they  were  a  part. 

Had  the  State  been  totally  separated  from  religion,  taking 

no  cognizance  of   it  in  any  way  whatever  ;   had  the  State 

confined  itself  to  its  proper  jurisdiction,  and  used  its  power 

and  authority  to  compel  people  to  be  civil  and  to  maintain 

15 


162         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

the  public  peace,  it  would  have  been  impossible  for  either 
people,  priests,  governors,  or  emperors,  to  be  persecutors. 
Had  there  been  no  laws  on  the  subject  of  religion,  no  laws 
enforcing  respect  for  the  gods,  nor  prohibiting  the  introduc- 
tion of  new  religions, —  even  though  religious  controversies 
might  have  arisen,  and  having  arisen  even  had  they  engen- 
dered bitter  controversies  and  stirred  up  spiteful  spirits, —  it 
would  have  been  impossible  for  any  party  to  do  any  manner 
of  wrong  to  another. 

Instead  of  this,  however,  the  Roman  government  was  a 
system  in  which  religion  was  inseparable  from  the  State  —  a 
system  in  which  the  religion  recognized  was  held  as  essential 
to  the  very  existence  -of  the  State  ;  and  the  laws  which  com- 
pelled respect  to  this  religion  were  but  the  efforts  of  the 
State  at  self-preservation.  Therefore  there  was  a  system  per- 
manently established,  and  an  instrument  formed,  ready  to  be 
wielded  by  every  one  of  these  agencies  to  persecute  the  pro- 
fessors of  that  religion. 

Except  in  cases  of  the  open  violence  of  the  mob,  all  that 
was  done  in  any  instance  by  any  of  the  agencies  mentioned, 
was  to  enforce  the  law.  If  the  Christians  had  obeyed  the 
laws,  they  never  would  have  been  persecuted.  But  that  was 
the  very  point  at  issue.  It  was  not  right  to  obey  the  laws. 
Tlie  laws  were  wrong.  To  obey  the  laws  was  to  cease  to  be 
a  Christian.  To  obey  the  laws  was  to  dishonor  God  and  to 
deny  Christ.  To  obey  the  laws  was  to  consent  that  mankind 
should  be  deprived  of  the  blessing  of  both  civil  and  religious 
liberty,  as  well  as  to  forfeit  for  themselves  eternal  life. 

If  religion  be  properly  a  matter  of  State,  and  rightfully 
a  subject  of  legislation,  then  there  never  was  any  such  thing 
as  persecution  of  the  Christians.  And  what  is  more,  there 
never  has  been  in  all  history  any  such  thing  as  persecution 
on  account  of  religion.  If  religion  be  properly  a  subject  of 
legislation  and  of  law,  then  it  is  the  right  of  the  State  to 
make  any  laws  it  may  choose  on  the  subject  of  religion  ;  and 
it  is  its  right  to  attach  to  these  laws  whatever  penalty  will 


CHRISTIANITY  VICTORIOUS.  163 

most  surely  secure  proper  respect  for  the  religion  chosen. 
And  if  the  legislation  be  right,  if  the  law  be  right,  the  en- 
forcement of  the  law  under  whatever  penalty  cannot  be 
wrong.  Consequently  if  religion  be  properly  a  matter  of 
the  State,  of  legislation,  and  of  law,  there  never  was  and 
there  never  can  be  any  such  thing  as  persecution  on  account 
of  religion  or  for  conscience'  sake. 

From  all  these  evidences  it  is  certain  that  the  real  blame 
and  the  real  guilt  of  the  persecution  of  the  Christians  by  the 
Roman  empire  lay  in  the  pagan  theory  of  State  and  govern- 
ment—  the  union  of  religion  and  the  State.  This  was  the 
theory  of  the  State,  and  the  only  theory  that  then  held  sway, 
and  this  necessarily  embodied  both  a  civil  and  a  religious 
despotism.  And  as  Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world  to  set 
men  free  and  to  plant  in  their  hearts  and  minds  the  genuine 
principles  of  liberty,  it  was  proper  that  he  should  command 
that  this  message  of  freedom,  and  this  principle  of  liberty, 
should  be  proclaimed  in  all  the  world  to  every  creature, 
even  though  it  should  meet  with  the  open  hostility  of  earth's 
mightiest  power.  And  proclaim  it  his  disciples  did,  at  the 
expense  of  heavy  privations  and  untold  sufferings. 

"Among  the  authentic  records  of  pagan  persecutions, 
there  are  histories  which  display,  perhaps  more  vividly  than 
any  other,  both  the  depth  of  cruelty  to  which  human  nature 
may  sink,  and  the  heroism  of  resistance  it  may  attain.  .  .  . 
The  most  horrible  recorded  instances  of  torture  were  usually 
inflicted,  either  by  the  populace  or  in  their  presence  in  the 
arena.  We  read  of  Christians  bound  in  chairs  of  red-hot 
iron,  while  the  stench  of  their  half-consumed  flesh  rose  in  a 
suffocating  cloud  to  heaven  ;  of  others  who  were  torn  to  the 
very  bone  by  shells  or  hooks  of  iron  ;  of  holy  virgins  given 
over  to  the  lust  of  the  gladiator,  or  to  the  mercies  of  the 
pander  ;  of  two  hundred  and  twenty-seven  converts  sent  on 
one  occasion  to  the  mines,  each  with  the  sinews  of  one  leg 
severed  by  a  red-hot  iron,  and  with  an  eye  scooped  from  its 
socket ;  of  fires  so  slow  that  the  victims  writhed  for  hours  in 


164         CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

their  agonies  ;  of  bodies  torn  limb  from  limb,  or  sprinkled 
with  burning  load  ;  of  mingled  salt  and  vinegar  poured  over 
the  flesh  that  was  bleeding  from  the  rack  ;  of  tortures  pro- 
longed and  varied  through  entire  days.  For  the  love  of 
their  divine  Master,  for  the  cause  they  believed  to  be  true, 
men,  and  even  weak  girls,  endured  these  things  without 
flinching,  when  one  word  would  have  freed  them  from  their 
sufferings.  No  opinion  we  may  form  of  the  proceedings  of 
priests  in  a  later  age,  should  impair  the  reverence  with  which 
we  bend  before  the  martyr's  tomb."  -Lecky.u 

All  this  was  endured  by  men  and  women,  and  even  weak 
girls,  that  people  in  future  ages  might  be  free  —  free  to  wor- 
ship according  to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences — free 
both  civilly  and  religiously.  All  this  was  endured  in  sup- 
port of  the  principle  that  with  religion  civil  government 
can  of  right  have  nothing  to  do.  Yet  for  two  hundred  and 
fifty  years  this  contest  continued.  On  one  side  was  the 
poor  and  despised,  on  the  other  the  rich  and  the  honored. 
On  one  side  was  the  apparently  weak,  yet  really  strong  ;  on 
the  other  the  apparently  powerful,  yet  really  weak.  On  one 
side  was  a  new  doctrine  sustained  by  no  earthly  power,  and 
without  recognition  ;  on  the  other  side  was  a  system  which 
was  the  outgrowth  of  ages,  and  supported  by  all  the  resources 
of  the  mightiest  empire  that  the  world  had  ever  known. 
Yet  it  was  the  conflict  of  truth  and  right  against  error  and 
wrong,  of  the  power  of  God  against  the  power  of  the 
Roman  State  ;  and  it  was  bound  to  conquer.  Two  hundred 
and  fifty  years  this  contest  continued,  and  then  as  the  out- 
come of  the  longest,  the  most  wide-spread,  and  the  most  ter- 
rible persecution  that  ever  was  inflicted  by  the  Roman  State, 
that  empire  was  forced  officially  to  recognize  the  right  of 
every  man  to  worship  as  he  pleased.  Thus  was  Christianity 
acknowledged  to  be  victorious  over  all  the  power  of  Rome. 
The  rights  of  conscience  were  established,  and  the  separa- 
tion of  religion  and  the  State  was  virtually  complete. 

14  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  end  of  chap,  iii, 


CHRISTIANITY  MEANS  RIGHTS  OF  CONSCIENCE.      105 

Whatever  men  may  hold  Christianity  to  be,  however 
they  may  view  it,  whether  as  the  glorious  reality  that  it  is, 
or  only  a  myth  ;  whether  as  the  manifestation  of  the  truth 
of  God,  or  only  an  invention  of  men  ;  —  it  never  can  be 
denied  that  from  Christianity  alone  the  world  received  that 
inestimable  boon,  the  rights  of  conscience  ;  and  the  principle 

—  invaluable  alike  to  religion,  the  State,  and  the  individual 

—  of  the  absolute,  complete,  and  total  separation  between  the 
civil  and  the  religious  powers. 

It  never  can  be  denied  that  Christianity  was  in  the 
Roman  empire  in  the  first  and  second  centuries  as  really  as 
it  ever  was  at  any  time  afterward.  Marcus  Aurelius,  Sueto- 
nius, Hadrian,  Tacitus,  Trajan,  and  Pliny,  all  give  the  most 
unexceptionable  testimony  that  it  was  there.  And  just  as 
certainly  as  it  was  there,  so  certainly  did  it  proclaim  the 
right  of  men  to  worship  according  to  the  dictates  of 'their 
own  consciences,  and  that  the  State  has  not  of  right  any- 
thing to  do  with  religion.  And  so  certainly  was  there  a 
prolonged  and  terrible  contest  upon  this  issue.  Therefore 
those  who  object  to  Christianity  while  advocating  the  rights 
of  conscience,  and  opposing  a  union  of  religion  and  the 
State,  contradict  themselves  and  undermine  the  foundation 
upon  which  they  stand.  Christianity  is  the  glorious  original 
of  the  rights  of  conscience  and  of  the  individual.  Jesus 
Christ  was  the  first  to  announce  it  to  the  world ;  and  his 
disciples  were  the  first  to  proclaim  it  to  all  men,  and  to 
maintain  it  in  behalf  of  all  men  in  all  future  ages.  George 
Bancroft  states  the  literal  truth  when  he  says  :  — 

"No  one  thought  of  vindicating  religion  for  the  conscience  of  the 
individual,  till  a  voice  in  Judea,  breaking  day  for  the  greatest  epoch  in 
the  life  of  humanity,  by  establishing  a  pure,  spiritual,  and  universal 
religion  for  all  mankind,  enjoined  to  render  to  Caesar  only  that  which  is 
Caesar's.  The  rule  was  upheld  during  the  infancy  of  the  gospel  for  all 
men."15 


15 "History  of  the  Formation  of  the  Constitution  of  the   United   States," 
book  v,  chap,  i,  par.  10. 


166        CHRISTIANITY  AND    THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

Therefore  it  is  not  too  much  to  repeat  that,  from  Chris- 
tianity alone  the  world  has  received  that  inestimable  boon, 
the  rights  of  conscience  ;  and  the  principle  invaluable  alike 
to  religion,  the  State,  and  the  individual — of  the  absolute, 
complete,  and  total  separation  between  the  civil  and  the  relig- 
ious powers. 

Yet  this  victory  of  Christianity  over  Pagan  Rome  was  no 
sooner  won,  and  the  assured  triumph  of  Christianity  was  no 
sooner  at  hand,  than  ambitious  bishops  and  political  priests 
perverted  it  and  destroyed  the  prospect  of  all  its  splendid 
fruit.  They  seized  upon  the  civil  power,  and  by  making  the 
State  the  servant  of  the  church,  established  a  despotism  as 
much  more  cruel  than  the  one  which  had  just  been  con- 
quered, as  the  truth  which  was  thus  perverted  was  higher, 
nobler,  and  .more  glorious  than  the  evil  system  which  had 
been  established  in  the  blindness  and  error  of  paganism. 

The  system  which  had  been  conquered  was  that  in  which 
the  State  recognizes  and  makes  use  of  religion  only  for  its 
political  value,  and  only  as  the  servant  of  the  State.  This 
was  paganism,  and  such  a  system  is  pagan  wherever  found. 
The  system  which  was  established  by  the  perversion  of 
Christianity  and  the  splendid  victory  that  it  had  won,  was 
a  system  in  which  the  State  is  made  the  servant  of  the 
church,  and  in  which  the  power  of  the  State  is  exercised  to 
promote  the  interests  of  the  church.  This  was  the  papacy. 

And  to  tell  the  history  of  the  perversion  of  Christianity, 
and  the  establishment,  and  the  support,  of  the  papal  des- 
potism, is  the  purpose  of  the  following  chapters  of  this  book. 


CHAPTER   VI. 


THE   RISE    OF    CONSTANTINE. 

"PvUKING  the  eighty  years  occupied  for  the  most  part  by 
LJ  the  "dark,  unrelenting  Tiberius,  the  furious  Caligula, 
the  feeble  Claudius,  the  profligate  and  cruel  Nero,  the 
beastly  Yitellius,  and  the  timid,  inhuman  Domitian,"  "  Rome 
groaned  beneath  an  unremitting  tyranny,  which  extermi- 
nated the  ancient  families  of  the  republic  and  was  fatal 
to  almost  every  virtue,  and  every  talent,  that  arose  in  that 
unhappy  period."  -  Gibbon* 

This  dreary  scene  was  relieved  by  a  respite  of  eighty-four 
years  through  the  successful  reigns  of  Nerva,  Trajan, 
Hadrian,  Antoninus  Pius,  and  Marcus  Aurelius  ;  only  to  be 
opened  up  again  by  Commodus,  A.  D.  180,  and  to  continue 
unrelieved  for  more  than  one  hundred  years.  It  is  useless 
to  pursue  the  subject  in  detail.  Of  this  period  it  may  be 
remarked  as  of  one  before,  that  to  attempt  to  follow  it  in 
detail,  would  be  only  "  to  record  the  mandates  of  despotism, 
incessant  accusations,  faithless  friendships,  the  ruin  of  inno- 
cence ;  one  unvarying  repetition  of  causes  terminating  in 
the  same  event,  and  presenting  no  novelty  from  their  simi- 
larity and  tiresome  reiteration."  —  Tacitus? 

The  inroads  of  the  barbarians  obliged  the  legions  to  be 
always  stationed  on  the  frontier  of  the  empire,  all  the  way 
from  the  mouth  of  the  Rhine  to  the  mouth  of  the  Danube. 
Emperors  were  made  and  unmade  by  the  soldiers  according 
to  their  own  caprice,  many  of  whom  never  saw  the  capital 

111  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  iii,  par.  83.  2"  Annals,"  book  iv,  chap,  xxxlii. 

[167] 


168  THE  RISE   OF  CON8TANTINE. 

of  their  empire  ;  and  the  office  was  one  so  certainly  to  be 
terminated  by  murder  that  although  from  Commodus  to 
Constantine  there  were  sixty  men  named  as  emperor,  only 
seven  died  a  natural  death  ;  two  —  Decius  and  Valerian  — 
perished  by  the  enemy  ;  and  all  the  rest  were  murdered  in 
the  internal  strifes  of  the  failing  empire. 

DIOCLETIAN, 

the  commander  of  the  imperial  body-guard,  was  proclaimed 
emperor  by  the  troops  September  17,  285.  He  organized  a 
system  by  which  he  wished  to  give  to  the  office  of  emperor 
a  tenure  more  secure  than  that  allowed  by  the  licentious 
caprice  of  the  soldiery.  He  reigned  alone  only  about  six 
months,  when  —  April  1,  A.  D.  286  — he  associated  with  him- 
self in  the  office  of  emperor,  Maximian.  Six  years  after- 
ward, March  1,  A.  D.  292,  he  named  two  other  associates, 
Galerius  and  Constantius,  though  in  inferior  stations.  Dio- 
cletian and  Maximian  each  bore  the  title  of  Augustus,  while 
Galerius  and  Constantius  each  bore  that  of  Caesar.  Both 
these  Caesars  were  already  married,  but  each  was  obliged  to 
put  away  his  wife  and  be  adopted  as  a  son,  and  marry  a 
daughter,  of  one  of  the  Augusti.  Galerius  was  adopted  as 
the  son  of  Diocletian,  and  married  his  daughter ;  Constan- 
tius as  the  son  of  Maximian,  and  married  his  step-daughter. 
The  empire  was  then  divided  into  four  principal  parts,  each 
to  be  governed  by  one  of  the  four  emperors.  Diocletian  re- 
tained as  his  part,  Thrace,  Egypt,  and  Asia.  To  Maximian 
was  given  Italy  and  Africa.  Upon  Galerius  was  bestowed 
what  was  known  as  the  Illyrian  provinces,  bounded  by 
Thrace,  the  Adriatic,  the  Danube,  the  Alps,  and  the  Khine  ; 
while  to  Constantius  fell  all  that  was  west  of  the  Rhine  and 
the  Alps  ;  namely,  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain. 

It  appease  to  have  been  Diocletian's  intention  that  when- 
ever the  place  of  either  of  the  two  Augusti  became  vacant, 
it  should  be  filled  by  one  of  the  Caesars,  whose  place  in  turn 
should  be  filled  by  a  new  appointment,  thus  securing  a  per- 


DIOCLETIAN. 


THE  PERSECUTION  UNDER  DIOCLETIAN.          169 

manent,  peaceful,  and  steady  succession  to  the  imperial 
authority.  Nor  did  the  division  and  distribution  of  the 
offices  stop  here.  It  was  extended  in  regular  gradation  to 
the  smallest  parts  of  the  empire.  Diocletian  fixed  his  capital 
at  Nicomedia ;  and  Maximian  his  at  Milan,  which  under 
his  care  assumed  the  splendor  of  an  imperial  city.  "The 
houses  are  described  as  numerous  and  well  built ;  the  man- 
ners of  the  people  as  polished  and  liberal.  A  circus,  a 
theater,  a  mint,  a  palace,  baths,  which  bore  the  name  of 
their  founder  Maximian ;  porticoes  adorned  with  statues, 
and  a  double  circumference  of  walls  contributed  to  the 
beauty  of  the  new  capital.  .  .  .  By  the  taste  of  the  monarch, 
and  at  the  expense  of  the  people,  Nicomedia  acquired,  in 
the  space  of  a  few  years,  a  degree  of  magnificence  which 
might  appear  to  have  required  the  labor  of  ages,  and  became 
inferior  only  to  Rome,  Alexandria,  and  Antioch,  in  extent  or 
populousness."--  Gibbon*  And  with  the  exception  of  the 
short  reign  of  Maxentius,  from  the  day  when  these  two 
emperors  made  these  two  cities  their  capitals,  no  emperor 
ever  dwelt  in  Rome. 

Diocletian  and  Maximian  also  established  each  a  court 
and  a  ceremonial  modeled  upon  that  of  the  king  of  Persia. 
Whoever  would  address  the  emperor  must  pass  a  succession 
of  guards  and  officers,  and  "when  a  subject  was  at  last 
admitted  to  the  imperial  presence,  he  was  required,  whatever 
might  be  his  rank,  to  fall  prostrate  on  the  ground,  and  to 
adore  according  to  the  eastern  fashion,  the  divinity  of  his 
lord  and  master."  The  two  emperors  assumed  not  exactly 
crowns,  but  diadems,  the  first  that  had  been  worn  by  Romans 
since  the  abolition  of  the  kingly  office.  ' '  The  sumptuous 
robes  of  Diocletian  and  his  successors  were  of  silk  and  gold, 
and  it  is  remarked  with  indignation,  that  even  their  shoes 
were  studded  with  precious  stones." 

It  is,  however,  as  the  author  of  the  last  and  most  terrible 
persecution  of  Christianity  by  Pagan  Rome  —  the  last  effort 
of  the  pagan  State  against  the  freedom  of  thought  and  of 

3 Id.,  chap,  xfii,  par.  28. 


170  THE  RISE   OF  CONSTANTINO. 

worship  taught  by  Christianity  —  that  Diocletian  is  chiefly 
known  to  the  world,  though  strictly  speaking  he  was  not  the 
author  of  it. 

Diocletian  and  Constantius  were  both  friendly  to  the 
Christians,  and  had  many  professed  Christians  in  public  of- 
fices. In  considerable  numbers  they  were  employed  in  Dio- 
cletian's palace  ;  but  Galerius  and  Maximian  were  savagely 
opposed  to  every  form  of  the  Christian  name.  Galerius 
urged  upon  Diocletian  the  issuing  of  a  decree  condemning 
Christianity.  Diocletian  hesitated,  but  agreed  to  prohibit 
any  Christian  from  holding  any  public  office  or  employment, 
and  spoke  strongly  against  the  shedding  of  blood.  Galerius 
persuaded  him  to  allow  the  calling  of  a  council  of  the  officers 
of  the  State,  the  outcome  of  which  was  that  on  February  24, 
A.  D.  303,  a  "general  edict  of  persecution  was  published; 
and  though  Diocletian,  still  averse  to  the  effusion  of  blood, 
had  moderated  the  fury  of  Galerius,  who  proposed  that 
every  one  refusing  to  offer  sacrifice  should  immediately  be 
burnt  alive,  the  penalty  inflicted  on  the  obstinacy  of  the 
Christians  might  be  deemed  sufficiently  rigorous  and  ef- 
fectual. 

"It  was  enacted  that  their  churches  in  all  the  provinces 
of  the  empire  should  be  demolished  to  their  foundations,  and 
the  punishment  of  death  was  denounced  against  all  who 
should  presume  to  hold  any  secret  assemblies  for  the  pur- 
pose of  religious  worship.  The  philosophers,  who  now  as- 
sumed the  unworthy  office  of  directing  the  blind  zeal  of 
persecution,  had  diligently  studied  the  nature  and  genius  of 
the  Christian  religion  ;  and  as  they  were  not  ignorant  that 
the  speculative  doctrines  of  the  faith  were  supposed  to  be 
contained  in  the  writings  of  the  prophets,  of  the  evangelists, 
and  of  the  apostles,  they  most  probably  suggested  the  order 
that  the  bishops  and  the  presbyters  should  deliver  all  their 
sacred  books  into  the  hands  of  the  magistrates,  who  were 
commanded  under  the  severest  penalties,  to  burn  them  in  a 
public  and  solemn  manner.  By  the  same  edict  the  property 


THE  ATTACK  18  BEGUN.  171 

of  the  church  was  at  once  confiscated  ;  and  the  several  parts 
of  which  it  might  consist,  were  either  sold  to  the  highest 
bidder,  united  to  the  imperial  domain,  bestowed  on  the  cities 
and  corporations,  or  granted  to  the  solicitations  of  rapacious 
courtiers. 

"After  taking  such  effectual  measures  to  abolish  the 
worship  and  to  dissolve  the  government  of  the  Christians,  it 
was  thought  necessary  to  subject  to  the  most  intolerable  • 
hardships  the  condition  of  those  perverse  individuals  who 
should  still  reject  the  religion  of  nature,  of  Rome,  and  of 
their  ancestors.  Persons  of  a  liberal  birth  were  declared 
incapable  of  holding  any  honors  or  employments  ;  slaves 
were  forever  deprived  of  the  hopes  of  freedom,  and  the 
whole  body  of  the  people  were  put  out  of  the  protection  of 
the  law.  The  judges  were  authorized  to  hear  and  to  deter- 
mine every  action  that  was  brought  against  a  Christian. 
But  the  Christians  were  not  permitted  to  complain  of  any 
injury  which  they  themselves  had  suffered  ;  and  thus  those 
unfortunate  sectaries  were  exposed  to  the  severity,  while 
they  were  excluded  from  the  benefits,  of  public  justice." — 
Gibbon.* 

The  attack  upon  'the  church  buildings  began  the  day 
before  this  decree  was  published.  Then,  "at  the  earliest 
dawn  of  day,  the  Praetorian  prsefect,  accompanied  by  sev- 
eral generals,  tribunes,  and  officers  of  the  revenue,  repaired 
to  the  principal  church  of  Nicomedia,  which  was  situated  on 
an  eminence  in  the  most  populous  and  beautiful  part  of  the 
city.  The  doors  were  instantly  broke  open  ;  Jthey  rushed 
into  the  sanctuary  ;  and  as  they  searched  in  vain  for  some 
visible  object  of  worship,  they  were  obliged  to  content 
themselves  with  committing  to  the  flames  the  volumes  of 
Holy  Scripture.  The  ministers  of  Diocletian  were  followed 
by  a  numerous  body  of  guards  and  pioneers,  who  marched 
in  order  of  battle,  and  were  provided  with  all  the  instru- 
ments used  in  the  destruction  of  fortified  cities.  By  their 
incessant  labor,  a  sacred  edifice  which  towered  above  the 

*/d.,  chap,  xvi,  par.  45. 


THE  RISE  OF  CONSTANTINE. 

imperial  palace,  and  had  long  excited  the  indignation  and 
envy  of  the  Gentiles,  was  in  a  few  hours  leveled  with  the 
ground." — Gibbon*  , 

The  decree  had  hardly  been  posted  up  in  the  most  public 
place  in  Nicomedia,  when  a  professed  Christian,  whose  zeal 
outran  his  good  sense,  pulled  it  down,  and  tore  it  to  pieces. 
It  had  been  now  more  than  forty  years  since  the  decree  of 
Gallienus  had  legally  recognized  Christianity.  In  this  time 
of  peace  the  churches  had  become  filled  with  a  mass  of  people 
who  were  Christians  only  in  name.  Large  church  buildings 
were  built  in  all  parts  of  the  empire.  The  genuine  faith  and 
discipline  of  the  church  had  been  seriously  relaxed  long  be- 
fore that,  and  now  in  this  time  of  peace,  and  through  the 
vast  numbers  that  united  themselves  with  the  name  of  Chris- 
tianity, there  came  the  natural  result  —  violent  contention 
and  ambitious  aspirations.  Quite  a  striking  picture  of  the 
churches  in  this  time  is  given  us  in  the  following  extract,  by 
one  who  was  there  at  the  time  :  — 

"  When  by  reason  of  excessive  liberty,  we  sunk  into  negligence  and 
sloth,  one  envying  and  reviling  another  in  different  ways,  and  we  were 
almost,  as  it  were,  on  the  point  of  taking  up  arms  against  each  other  and 
were  assailing  each  other  with  words  as  witR  darts  and  spears,  prelates 
inveighing  against  prelates,  and  people  rising  up  against  people,  and 
hypocrisy  and  dissimulation  had  arisen  to  the  greatest  height  of  malig- 
nity, then  the  divine  judgment  which  usually  proceeds  with  a  lenient 
hand,  whilst  the  multitudes  were  yet  crowding  into  the  church,  with 
gentle  and  mild  visitations  began  to  afflict  its  episcopacy,  the  persecu- 
tion having  begun  with  those  brethren  that  were  in  the  army.  But  as  if 
destitute  of  all  sensibility,  we  were  not  prompt  in  measures  to  appease 
and  propitiate  the  Deity  ;  some,  indeed,  like  atheists,  regarding  our  situ- 
ation as  unheeded  and  unobserved  by  a  providence,  we  added  one  wick- 
edness and  misery  to  another.  But  some  that  appeared  to  be  our  pastors, 
deserting  the  law  of  piety,  were  inflamed  against  each  other  with  mutual 
strifes,  only  accumulating  quarrels  and  threats,  rivalship,  hostility,  and 
hatred  to  each  other,  only  anxious  to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind  of 
sovereignty  for  themselves."  —  Eusebius.  6 

When  the  decree  was  issued  for  the  abolition  of  Chris- 
tianity, vast  multitudes  of  these  formal  professors  turned 

6/d.,  par.  44.  6  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  viii,  chap,  i, 


AFFLICTIONS  OF   THE  PERSECUTORS. 

back  again  with  the  same  readiness  and  with  the  same  selfish 
motives  with  which  they  had  joined  the  church  ;  and  as  is 
always  the  case,  their  easy  rejection  of  the  faith  made  the 
persecution  so  much  the  more  severe  upon  those  refusing  to 
yield. 

Within  fifteen  days  after  the  publication  of  the  edict,  a 
fire  broke  out  twice  in  the  emperor's  palace  at  Nicomedia, 
and  although  it  was  quenched  both  times  without  doing  any 
material  damage,  as  it  was  attributed  to  the  resentment  of 
the  Christians,  it  caused  their  suffering  to  be  yet  more  severe. 
"At  first,  indeed,  the  magistrates  were  restrained  from  the 
effusion  of  blood  ;  but  the  use  of  every  other  severity  was 
permitted,  and  even  recommended  to  their  zeal  ;  nor  could 
the  Christians,  though  they  cheerfully  resigned  the  ornaments 
of  their  churches,  resolve  to  interrupt  their  religious  assem- 
blies, or  to  deliver  their  sacred  books  to  the  flames." — 
Gibbon."1 

As  they  refused  to  discontinue  their  meetings  or  to  burn 
the  Scriptures,  another  edict  was  shortly  passed,  command- 
ing that  all  the  bishops,  presbyters,  readers,  and  exorcists 
should  be  punished.  Another'  edict  soon  followed,  com- 
manding the  magistrates  everywhere  to  compel  all  these  to 
renounce  the  Christian  faith  and  return  to  the  worship  of 
the  gods  by  offering  the  appointed  sacrifice.  This  again 
was  soon  followed  by  an  edict,  the  fourth  in  the  series, 
including  the  whole  body  of  the  Christians  within  the  pro- 
visions of  the  edicts  which  had  preceded.  Heavy  penalties 
were  pronounced  against  all  who  should  attempt  to  shield 
the  Christians  from  the  force  of  the  edicts. 

"Many  were  .burnt  alive,  and  the  tortures  by  which  the 
persecutors  sought  to  shake  their  resolution  were  so  dreadful 
that  even  such  a  death  seemed  an  act  of  mercy.  The  only 
province  of  the  empire  where  the  Christians  were  at  peace 
was  Gaul,  which  had  received  its  baptism  of  blood  under 
Marcus  Aurelius,  but  was  now  governed  by  Constantius 
Chlorus,  who  protected  them  from  personal  molestation, 

7  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xvl,  par.  48, 


174  THE  RISE   OF   CONSTANTINE. 

though  he  was  compelled,  in  obedience  to  the  emperor,  to 
destroy  their  churches.  In  Spain,  which  was  also  under  the 
government,  but  not  under  the  direct  inspection  of  Constan- 
tius,  the  persecution  was  moderate,  but  in  all  other  parts  of 
the  empire  it  raged  with  fierceness,  till  the  abdication  of 
Diocletian  in  305.  This  event  almost  immediately  restored 
peace  to  the  western  province,  but  greatly  aggravated  the 
misfortunes  of  the  Eastern  Christians,  who  passed  under  the 
absolute  rule  of  Galerius.  Horrible,  varied,  and  prolonged 
tortures  were  employed  to  quell  their  fortitude,  and  their 
final  resistance  was  crowned  by  the  most  dreadful  of  all 
deaths,  roasting  over  a  slow  fire. 

"It  was  not  till  A.  D.  311,  eight  years  after  the  com- 
mencement of  the  general  persecution,  ten  years  after  the 
first  measure  against  the  Christians,  that  the  Eastern  perse- 
cution ceased.  Galerius,  the  archenemy  of  the  Christians, 
was  struck  down  by  a  fearful  disease.  His  body,  it  is  said, 
became  a  mass  of  loathsome  and  fetid  sores  —  a  living 
corpse,  devoured  by  countless  worms,  and  exhaling  the  odor 
of  a  charnel-house.  He  who  had  shed  so  much  innocent 
blood,  shrank  himself  from  -a  Roman  death.  In  his  extreme 
anguish  he  appealed  in  turn  to  physician  after  physician,  and 
to  temple  after  temple.  At  last  he  relented  towards  the 
Christians.  He  issued  a  proclamation  restoring  them  to 
liberty,  permitting  them  to  rebuild  their  churches,  and  ask- 
ing their  prayers  for  his  recovery." — Lecky* 

The  edict  of  Galerius  here  referred  to  was  as  follows  :  — 

"Among  the  important  cares  which  have  occupied  our  mind  for  the 
utility  and  preservation  of  the  empire,  it  was  our  intention  to  correct 
and  re-establish  all  things  according  to  the  ancient  laws  and  public 
discipline  of  the  Romans.  We  were  particularly  desirous  of  reclaiming, 
into  the  way  of  reason  and  nature,  the  deluded  Christians,  who  had 
renounced  the  religion  and  ceremonies  instituted  by  their  fathers  ;  and 
presumptuously  despising  the  practice  of  antiquity,  had  invented  extrava- 
gant laws  and  opinions  according  to  the  dictates  of  their  fancy,  and  had 
collected  a  various  society  from  the  different  provinces  of  our  empire. 

8  "  History  of  European  Morals,"  chap,  iii,  par.  3  from  the  end. 


ROME   SURRENDERS.  175 

The  edicts  which  we  have  published  to  enforce  the  worship  of  the  gods, 
having  exposed  many  of  the  Christians  to  danger  and  distress,  many 
having  suffered  death,  and  many  more  who  still  persist  in  their  impious 
folly,  being  left  destitute  of  any  public  exercise  of  religion,  we  are 
disposed  to  extend  to  those  unhappy  men  the  effects  of  our  wonted 
clemency.  We  permit  them  therefore  freely  to  profess  their  private 
opinions  and  to  assemble  in  their  conventicles  without  fear  or  molesta- 
tion, provided  always  that  they  preserve  a  due  respect  to  the  established 
laws  and  government.  By  another  rescript  we  shall  signify  our  inten- 
tions to  the  judges  and  magistrates,  and  we  hope  that  our  indulgence 
will  engage  the  Christians  to  offer  up  their  prayers  to  the  deity  whom 
they  adore,  for  our  safety  and  prosperity,  for  their  own,  and  for  that  of 
the  republic."  9 

Shortly  after  Diocletian  issued  the  last  of  the  four  edicts 
against  Christianity,  and  in  the  twenty-second  year  of  his 
reign,  he  abdicated  the  empire,  May  1,  A.  D.  305.  By  previ- 
ous arrangement  Maximian  on  his  part  also  abdicated  the 
imperial  authority  at  his  palace  in  Milan.  "  The  abdication 
of  Diocletian  and  Maximian  was  succeeded  by  eighteen 
years  of  discord  and  confusion.  The  empire  was  afflicted 
by  five  civil  wars  ;  and  the  remainder  of  the  time  was  not 
so  much  a  state  of  tranquillity  as  a  suspension  of  arms  be- 
tween several  hostile  monarchs  who,  viewing  each  other  with 
an  eye  of  fear  and  hatred,  strove  to  increase  their  respective 
forces  at  the  expense  of  their  subjects."-  -  G'ibbon.w 

Galerius  and  Constantius  immediately  succeeded  to  the 
places  of  these  two,  each'  assuming  the  title  of  Augustus. 
Galerius  at  once  assumed  to  himself  the  authority  to  appoint 
the  two  Caesars,  without  waiting  to  consult  Constantius.  As 
a  matter  of  course  he  appointed  those  whom  he  could  use  to 
promote  his  own  ambitious  designs  to  secure  to  himself  the 
supreme  authority  in  the  empire.  One  of  these  was  his  own 
nephew,  Maximin,  who  was  given  command  of  Syria  and 
Egypt.  The  other  was  one  of  his  own  subordinate  officers, 
Severus,  who  was  sent  to  Milan  to  succeed  Maximian. 


'Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  viii,  chap.  xvii.    I  adopt  Gibbon's 
translation,  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xvi,  par.  56.  10  /d.,  chap,  xiv,  par.  1. 

16 


176  THE  RISE   OF   CON8TANTINE. 

Thus  Galerius  virtually  held  control  of  three  fourths  of 
the  empire,  and  only  waited  a  good  opportunity  to  lay  claim 
to  the  rest.  This  opportunity  he  supposed  was  given  him 
when,  July  25,  A.  D.  306,  Constantius  died  in  Britain  ;  but 
he  was  disappointed,  for  as  soon  as  Constantius  was  dead, 
the  army  proclaimed  Constantine  Augustus  and  emperor, 
and  a  messenger  was  sent  to  Galerius  to  announce  to  him 
the  fact.  Such  a  proceeding  had  not  been  included  in  his 
plans,  and  Galerius  threatened  to  burn  both  the  letter  and 
the  messenger  who  brought  it.  Constantine,  however,  at 
the  head  of  the  legions  of  Britain,  was  in  a  position  not  to  be 
despised.  Galerius,  therefore,  decided  to  make  the  best  of 
the  situation.  He  recognized  Constantine  as  the  successor 
of  Constantius  in  that  division  of  the  empire,  with  the  title 
of  Caesar,  but  fourth  in  rank,  while  he  raised  Severus  to  the 
dignity  of  Augustus. 

Just  at  this  time  there  was  another  important  move  upon 
the  stage  of  action.  The  people  of  the  city  of  Rome  were 
greatly  offended  at  the  action  of  Diocletian  in  removing  the 
capital,  and  Galerius  now  took  a  step  that  deepened  their 
sense  of  injury.  A  general  census  was  begun  to  list  all  the 
property  of  the  Roman  citizens  for  the  purpose  of  levying  a 
general  tax.  Wherever  there  was  any  suspicion  of  conceal- 
ment of  any  property,  the  citizen  was  tortured  to  compel  an 
honest  statement  of  his  possessions.  Rome  had  been  exempt 
from  taxation  for  nearly  five  hundred  years,  and  when  the 
census  takers  began  their  work  there,  the  injury  which  the 
people  felt  that  they  had  already  suffered  by  the  removal  of 
their  capital,  was  so  deepened,  that  they  broke  out  into  open 
revolt,  and  proclaimed  Maxentius  emperor,  October  28,  A.  D. 
306.  Maxentius  was  the  son  of  Maximian.  "The  praefect 
of  the  city  and  a  few  magistrates,  who  maintained  their 
fidelity  to  Severus,  were  massacred  by  the  guards  ;  and 
Maxentius,  invested  with  the  imperial  ornaments,  was  ac- 
knowledged by  the  applauding  Senate  and  people  as  the 
protector  of  the  Roman  freedom  and  dignity." — Gibbon.11 

11/d.,  chap,  xiv,  par.  10. 


SIX  EMPERORS  AT  ONCE. 

At  the  invitation  of  Maxentius  and  the  Senate,  Maximian 
gladly  left  his  place  of  retirement,  and  again  assumed  the 
position  of  associate  emperor.  Galerius  ordered  Severus, 
who  was  stationed  at  Milan,  to  march  to  Rome  and  put 
down  this  .rebellion.  But  when  he  reached  the  city,  he 
found  it  so  well  fortified  and  defended  against  him  that  he 
dared  not  attack  it.  Besides  this,  a  large  number  of  his 
troops  deserted  him  to  their  old  commander  Maximian,  and 
he  was  compelled,  if  he  would  save  his  life,  to  march  back 
again  as  fast  as  he  could.  He  stopped  at  Ravenna,  which 
was  strongly  fortified,  and  where  he  had  a  large  fleet.  Max- 
imian soon  came  up  and  began  a  seige.  Severus  had  found 
so  little  favor  among  the  people  of  Italy,  and  had  been 
deserted  by  so  large  a  number  of  his  troops,  that  Max- 
imian found  it  an  easy  task  to  convince  him  that  there  was 
a  plan  formed  by  the  city  of  Ravenna  also,  to  betray  him  and 
deliver  him  up.  By  this  means,  and  the  positive  assurance 
that  his  life  would  be  preserved,  Severus  was  persuaded  to 
surrender.  But  no  sooner  was  the  city  secured,  than  he  found 
that  the  only  liberty  that  was  left  him  was  to  kill  himself. 

February  A.  D.  307,  Maximian  went  to  Milan,  took  pos- 
session of  his  former  capital,  and  without  waiting,  crossed 
the  Alps  to  meet  Constantine,  who  was  then  at  Aries  in 
Gaul.  March  31  an  alliance  was  formed.  Constantine 
married  Maximian's  daughter  Fausta,  and  Maximian  gave 
him  the  title  of  Augustus.  Galerius  himself  now  under- 
took to  punish  the  Romans  for  their  rebellion  ;  but  his 
experience  was  identical  with  that  of  Severus,  only  that  he 
was  fortunate  enough  to  escape  with  his  life  and  some  of  his 
troops.  In  his  retreat,  the  enmity  of  the  Romans  was  yet 
more  deepened  by  the  desolation  which  his  legions  left  in 
their  train.  "They  murdered,  they  ravished,  they  plun- 
dered, they  drove  away  the  flocks  and  herds  of  the  Italians  ; 
they  burnt  the  villages  through  which  they  passed,  and  they 
endeavored  to  destroy  the  country  which  it  had  not  been  in 
their  power  to  subdue."  -  GH&on™ 

12  Id.,  par.  14. 


178  THE  RISE   OF  CONSTANTINE. 

Galerius,  not  willing  to  recognize  either  Maxentius  or 
Maximian,  appointed  Licinius  to  the  office  of  Augustus, 
November  11,  307,  to  fill  the  vacancy  caused  by  the  death  of 
Severus.  Maximin,  governor  of  Syria  and  Egypt,  with  the 
title  of  Cassar,  no  sooner  heard  of  the  appointment  of  Licinius 
to  the  title  of  Augustus,  than  he  demanded  of  Galerius  the 
same  honor  ;  and  the  demand  was  made  in  a  tone  which  in 
the  existing  condition  of  things  Galerius  wras  compelled  to 
respect.  Thus  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  308,  "for  the 
first,  and  indeed  for  the  last,  time  the  Roman  world  was 
administered  by  six  emperors."  -  G-ibbon.™ 

It  was  not  however  the  purpose  of  these  six  emperors  to 
administer  the  Roman  world  together.  Each  one  was  deter- 
mined to  administer  it  alone.  Each  one  was  jealous  of  all 
the  others,  and  narrowly  watched  them  all,  ready  instantly 
to  grasp  and  make  the  most  of  whatever  opportunity  might 
present  itself.  The  first  two  of  the  emperors  between  whom 
this  mutual  jealousy  produced  an  open  quarrel,  were  Maxim- 
ian and  Maxentius.  Maxentius  refused  to  acknowledge  him- 
self subordinate  to  his  father,  and  his  father  insisted  that  it 
was  by  his  ability  as  a  commander  that  Maxentius  was  made 
secure  in  his  claim  to  the  dignity  of  emperor.  The  differ- 
ence between  them  was  submitted  to  the  troops  for  decision. 
They  decided  in  favor  of  Maxentius.  Maximian  left  his  son 
and  Italy,  and  went  to  his  son-in-law  Constantino,  in  Gaul, 
and  there  a  second  time  he  abdicated  the  imperial  dignity ; 
but  only  that  he  might  the  more  securely  contrive  new 
mischiefs. 

Not  long  afterward  an  invasion  of  the  Franks  called 
Constantine  and  his  troops  to  the  Rhine  north  of  the  Moselle. 
A  report  of  the  death  of  Constantine  was  hastily  seized  upon 
by  Maximian  as  the  truth,  and  he  assumed  the  position  of 
emperor ;  took  the  money  from  Constantino's  treasury,  and 
distributed  it  among  the  soldiers  ;  and  began  overtures  for 
an  alliance  with  Maxentius.  Constantine  heard  of  Max- 
irnian's  movements  ;  marched  quickly  from  the  Rhine  to  the 

13  Id.,  par.  15. 


ROMAN  EMBASSIES   TO   CONSTANTINE.  If9 

Saone  ;  took  some  boats  at  Chalons  ;  and  with  his  legions 
so  unexpectedly  arrived  at  Aries  that  Maximian  considered 
it  his  only  safety  to  take  refuge  in  Marseilles.  Constantine 
followed  and  attacked  the  city.  The  garrison  gave  up 
Maximian,  who,  like  Severus,  was  allowed  the  choice  of 
killing  himself  or  of  being  put  to  death. 

Galerius  died  in  the  month  of  May,  A.  D.  311.  Four  of  the 
six  emperors  now  remained,  and  another  apportionment  of 
the  eastern  dominions  was  made  between  Licinius  and 
Maximin.  With  the  latter  Maxentius  formed  an  alliance 
which  drew  Constantine  and  Licinius  together  on  the  other 
side.  "  Maxentius  was  cruel,  rapacious,  and  profligate,"  "a 
tyrant  as  contemptible  as  he  was  odious."  In  him  it  seemed 
as  though  the  times  of  Commodus  and  Elagabalus  were 
returned. 

In  A.  D.  308,  Marcellus  was  elected  bishop  of  Rome. 
"This  new  bishop  wished  to  avail  himself  of  the  calm 
which  religion  enjoyed,  at  the  commencement  of  his  pon- 
tificate, to  ordain  rules  and  re-establish  in  the  church  the 
discipline  which  the  troubles  [of  the  Galerian  persecution] 
had  altered.  But  his  severity  rendered  him  odious  to  the 
people,  and  caused  divisions  among  the  faithful.  Discord 
degenerated  into  sedition,  arid  the  quarrel  terminated  in 
murder."  Maxentius  blamed  Marcellus  as  being  the  chief 
cause  of  these  disturbances,  ' '  and  condemned  him  to  groom 
post-horses  in  a  stable  on  the  high-road.'' 

After  about  nine  months  of  this  service,  some  priests  suc- 
ceeded in  carrying  Marcellus  off.  They  concealed  him  in 
the  house  of  a  Roman  lady  named  Lucilla.  When  the  offi- 
cers would  have  taken  him  again,  the  faithful  assembled 
under  arms  to  defend  him.  Maxentius  ordered  out  his 
guards  and  dispersed  them.  He  then  commanded  that 
Lucilla's  house  should  be  converted  into  a  stable,  and  ob- 
liged Marcellus  to  continue  in  the  office  of  groom.  In  Jan- 
uary, A.  D.  310,  Marcellus  died,  and  was  succeeded  by 
Eusebius,  whom  Maxentius  banished  to  Sicily.  He  died 


180  THE  RISE   OF  CONSTANTINE. 

there  after  a  few  months,  and  was  succeeded  by  Melchiades, 
in  the  same  year,  A.  D.  310. 

In  A.  D.  311,  Melchiades  wrote  a  letter  to  Constantine, 
and  sent  it  by  a  delegation  of  bishops  to  him  at  Treves  in 
Gaul,  inviting  him  to  come  to  the  relief  of  the  church,  and 
the  conquest  of  Rome.  Constantine  deliberated,  and  Max- 
entius  became  more  and  more  tyrannical.  In  A.  D.  312,  an 
embassy  from  Rome  went  to  Constantine  at  Aries,  and  in 
the  name  of  the  Senate  and  people  requested  him  to  de- 
liver the  city  from  the  despotism  of  the  tyrant.  Constan- 
tine gladly  embraced  the  opportunity  thus  offered,  and 
quickly  set  out  toward  Rome.14 

At  Turin  he  met  and  destroyed  a  strong  body  of  the 
troops  of  Maxentius  ;  and  at  Verona  after,  a  considerable 
siege  of  the  city,  and  a  hard-fought  battle  in  the  field,  which, 
beginning  in  the  afternoon,  continued  through  the  whole  of 
the  following  night,  he  vanquished  quite  a  formidable  army. 
Between  Verona  and  Rome  there  was  nothing  to  check  the 
march  of  Constantine.  Maxentius  drew  out  his  army,  and 
met  Constantine  on  the  banks  of  the  Tiber,  nine  miles  from 
Rome.  He  crossed  the  Tiber  and  set  his  army  in  battle 
array,  with  the  river  in  his  rear.  The  battle  was  joined. 
Maxentius  was  soon  defeated ;  and  his  army,  broken  to 
pieces,  attempted  to  escape.  In  the  confusion  and  by  the 
terrible  onslaught  of  Constantino's  veterans,  thousands  of 
the  soldiers  of  Maxentius  were  crowded  into  the  river  and 
drowned.  Maxentius,  endeavoring  to  escape  on  his  horse 
across  the  Milvian  bridge,  was  crowded  off  into  the  river, 
and  being  clothed  with  heavy  armor,  was  drowned,  October 
28,  A.  D.  3]  2. 

In  the  month  of  March,  313,  Constantine  and  Licinius 
met  in  Milan.  Constantine's  sister  Constantia  was  given  in 
marriage  to  Licinius  as  a  bond  of  friendship  between  the 


u De  Cormenin,  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Marcellus,  Eusebius,  and  Mel- 
chiades; Bower,  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  16;  Gibbon,  "Decline 
and  Fall,"  chap,  xiv,  par.  20. 


THE  EDICT  OF  MILAN.  181 

two  emperors.  Maximin,  on  hearing  of  the  death  of  Max- 
entius,  declared  war  against  Licinius,  and  started  with  an 
army  from  Syria  toward  Europe.  He  crossed  the  Bosphorus, 
captured  Byzantium,  marched  onward  and  took  Heraclea. 
By  this  time  Licinius  himself  had  arrived  within  eighteen 
miles  of  that  place,  and  April  30  a  battle  was  fought,  and 
Maximin  was  defeated.  He  himself,  however,  escaped, 
and  in  the  month  of  the  following  August,  his  life  ended  in 
a  manner  not  certainly  known. 

The  edict  of  Galerius  restoring  to  the  Christians  the 
right  to  worship  had  had  little  or  no  effect  upon  Maximin. 
In  his  dominions  and  by  his  direction  the  persecutions  had 
continued.  Before  Constantine  and  Licinius  had  separated, 
after  their  meeting  at  Milan  in  March,  they  jointly  issued 
the  celebrated  edict  of  Milan,  which  acknowledged  the  right 
for  which  Christianity  had  contended  for  two  hundred  and 
fifty  weary  and  painful  years,  by  confirming  "  to  each  individ- 
ual of  the  Roman  world  the  privilege  of  choosing  and  pro- 
fessing his  own  religion."  That  edict  is  as  follows  :  — 

"Wherefore,  as  I,  Constantine  Augustus,  and  I,  Licinius  Augustus, 
came  under  favorable  auspices  to  Milan,  and  took  under  consideration 
all  affairs  that  pertained  to  the  public  benefit  and  welfare,  these  things 
among  the  rest  appeared  to  us  to  be  most  advantageous  and  profitable 
to  all. 

' '  We  have  resolved  among  the  first  things  to  ordain  those  matters 
by  which  reverence  and  worship  to  the  Deity  might  be  exhibited.  That 
is,  how  Ve  may  grant  likewise  to  the  Christians,  and  to  all,  the  free  choice 
to  follow  that  mode  of  worship  which  they  may  wish.  That  whatsoever 
divinity  and  celestial  power  may  exist,  may  be  propitious  to  us  and  to 
all  that  live  under  our  government.  Therefore,  we  have  decreed  the 
following  ordinance  as  our  will,  with  a  salutary  and  most  correct  inten- 
tion, that  no  freedom  at  all  shall  be  refused  to  Christians,  to  follow  or 
to  keep  their  observances  or  worship.  But  that  to  each  one  power  be 
granted  to  devote  his  mind  to  that  worship  which  he  may  think  adapted  to 
himself.  That  the  Deity  may  in  all  things  exhibit  to  us  his  accustomed 
favor  and  kindness. 

"  It  was  just  and  consistent  that  we  should  write  that  this  was  our 
pleasure.  That  all  exceptions  respecting  the  Christians  being  completely 


182  THE  RISE   OF   CONSTANTINE. 

removed,  which  were  contained  in  the  former  epistle  that  we  sent  to 
your  fidelity,  and  whatever  measures  were  wholly  sinister  and  foreign  to 
our  mildness,  that  these  should  be  altogether  annulled  ;  and  now  that 
each  one  of  the  Christians  may  freely  and  without  molestation  pursue 
and  follow  that  course  and  worship  which  he  has  proposed  to  himself  : 
which,  indeed,  we  have  resolved  to  communicate  most  fully  to  your  care 
and  diligence,  that  you  may  know  we  have  granted  liberty  and  full  freedom 
to  the  Christians,  to  observe  their  own  mode  of  worship ;  which  as  your 
fidelity  understands  absolutely  granted  to  them  by  us,  the  privilege  is  also 
granted  to  others  to  pursue  that  worship  and  religion  they  wish.  Which  it  is 
obvious  is  consistent  with  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  our  times  ;  that 
each  may  hate  the  privilege  to  select  and  to  worship  whatsoever  divinity  he 
pleases.  But  this  has  been  done  by  us,  that  we  might  not  appear  in  any 
manner  to  detract  anything  from  any  manner  of  religion,  or  any  mode 
of  worship."21 

If  all  the  professors  of  Christianity  had  been  content 
with  this  victory,  and  had  held  the  tide  of  events  steadily  to 
the  principles  of  this  edict, — the  principles  for  which  Chris- 
tianity had  so  long  contended, —  the  miseries  of  the  ages  to 
come  would  never  have  been. 

Yet  in  order  that  we  may  enter  upon  the  direct  history  of 
the  perversion  of  this  victory,  in  such  a  way  that  it  may  be 
best  understood,  it  is  essential  that  we  trace  two  other  lines 
of  events  that  culminate  in  Constantine,  and  which  gave  the 
most  material  force  to  that  important  series  of  movements 
which  made  the  papacy  a  success. 

21  "Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  x,  chap.  v. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


ANCIENT   SUN    WORSHIP. 

IN  the  history  of  mankind  no  form  of  idolatry  has  been 
more  widely  practiced  than  that  of  the  worship  of  the 
sun.  It  may  well  be  described  as  universal  ;  for  there  is 
scarcely  a  nation  in  which  the  worship  of  the  sun  in  some 
form  has  not  found  a  place.  In  Egypt,  the  oldest  nation  of 
historic  times,  under  the  names  of  Ra  and  Osiris,  with  half 
a  dozen  other  forms  ;  in  Phenicia  and  the  land  of  Canaan, 
under  the  names  of  Baal,  Melkarth,  Shamas,  Adoni,  Moloch, 
and  many  other  forms  ;  in  Syria,  Tammuz  and  Elagabalus  ; 
among  the  Moabites,  under  the  names  of  Baal-peor  and 
Chemosh  ;  among  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  under  the 
names  of  Bel  and  Shamas  ;  among  the  Medes  and  Persians 
and  other  kindred  nations,  under  the  name  of  Ormuz  and 
Mithra  ;  among  the  ancient  Indians,  under  the  name  of  Mitra, 
Mithra,  or  Mithras  ; *  in  Greece,  under  Adonis,  Apollo, 
Bacchus,  and  Hercules  ;  in  Phrygia,  under  the  term  Atys  ; 
and  in  Rome,  under  Bacchus,  Apollo,  and  Hercules  ;  —  in 

1  This  is  so  among  the  Hindus  of  India,  even  to  this  day.  "  The  most  sacred 
and  the  most  universally  used  —  even  to  the  present  day  —  of  all  Vedic  prayers 
is  that  composed  in  the  Gayatri  meter,  and  thence  called  Gayatri,  or,  as  addressed 
to  the  vivifying  Sun-god,  Savitri  :  '  Let  us  meditate  on  that  excellent  glory  of  the 
Divine  vivifier;  may  he  enlighten  our  understanding.'  " 

"  Turning  toward  the  Eastern  sky,  he  repeats  the  Gayatri  or  Savitri.  .  .  . 
This  prayer  is  the  most  sacred  of  all  Vedic  utterances,  and,  like  the  Lord's  prayer 
among  Christians,  .  .  .  must  always  among  Hindus  take  precedence  of  all  other 
forms  of  supplication.  The  next  division  of  the  service  is  called  Upasthana  (or 
Mitro-pasthana)  because  the  worshiper  abandons  his  sitting  posture,  stands  erect 
with  his  face  toward  the  rising  sun,  and  invokes  that  luminary  under  the  name  of 

[183] 


184  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

all  these  places,  and  under  all  these  forms,  the  sun  was  wor- 
shiped by  all  these  peoples.  The  myth  of  Hercules  alone 
will  illustrate  the  wide-spread  practice  of  this  worship : 
"The  mythology  of  Hercules  is  of  a  very  mixed  charac- 
ter in  the  form  in  which  it  has  come  down  to  us.  There 
is  in  it  the  identification  of  one  or  more  Grecian  heroes  with 
Melcarth,  the  sun-god  of  the  Phenicians.  Hence  we  find 
Hercules  so  frequently  represented  as  the  sun-god,  and  his 
twelve  labors  regarded  as  the  passage  of  the  sun  through 
the  twelve  signs  of  the  zodiac.  He  is  the  powerful  planet 
which  animates  and  imparts  fecundity  to  the  universe,  whose 
divinity  has  been  honored  in  every  quarter  by  temples 
and  altars,  and  consecrated  in  the  religious  strains  of  all 
nations.  From  Meroe  in  Ethiopia,  and  Thebes  in  Upper 
Egypt,  even  to  Britain,  and  the  icy  regions  of  Scythia  ;  from 
the  ancient  Taprobana  and  Palibothra  in  India,  to  Cadiz 
and  the  shores  of  the  Atlantic  ;  from  the  forests  of  Germany 
to  the  burning  sands  of  Africa  ;  —  everywhere,  in  short, 
where  the  benefits  of  the  luminary  of  day  are  experienced, 
there  we  find  established  the  name  and  worship  of  a  Her- 
cules. 

"Many  ages  before  the  period  when  Alcmena  is  said 
to  have  lived,  and  the  pretended  Tyrinthian  hero  to  have  per- 
formed his  wonderful  exploits,  Egypt  and  Phenicia,  which 
certainly  did  not  borrow  their  divinities  from  Greece,  had 
raised  temples  to  the  sun,  under  a  name  analogous  to  that  of 
Hercules,  and  had  carried  his  worship  to  the  isle  of  Thasus 
and  to  Gades.  Here  was  consecrated  a  temple  to  the  year, 


Mitra.     The  prayer  he  now  repeats  is  Rig-veda  iii,  59,  of  which  the  first  verse  is 
to  the  following  effect  :  — 

"  '  Mitra,  raising  his  voice,  calls  men  to  activity. 
Mitra  sustains  the  earth  and  the  sky. 
Mitra,  with  unwaking  eye,  beholds  all  creatures. 
Offer  to  Mitra  the  oblation  of  butter !  ' 

The  use  of  this  hymn,   is  the  morning  service  of  every  Hindu." — "  Jteliffiaus 
Thought  and  Life  in  India,"  chap,  i,  last  par.,  and  chap,  xv,  par.,  41,  57. 


HERCULES. 


THE  SECRET  OF  SUN  WORSHIP.  185 

and  to  the  months  which  divided  it  into  twelve  parts,  that  is, 
to  the  twelve  labors  or  victories  which  conducted  Hercules  to 
immortality.  It  is  under  the  name  of  Hercules  Astrochyton, 
or  the  god  clothed  with  a  mantle  of  stars,  that  the  poet  Kon- 
nus  designates  the  sun,  adored  by  the  Tyrians.  '  He  is  the 
same  god,'  observes  the  poet,  'whom  different  nations  adore 
under  a  multitude  of  different  names  :  Belus  on  the  bank  of 
the  Euphrates,  Ammon  in  Libya,  Apis  at  Memphis,  Saturn 
in  Arabia,2  Jupiter  in  Assyria,  Serapis  in  Egypt,  Helios 
among  the  Babylonians,  Apollo  at  Delphi,  ^Esculapius 
throughout  Greece,'  etc.  Martianus  Capella  in  his  hymn  to 
the  sun,  as  also  Ausonius  and  Macrobius,  confirms  the  fact 
of  this  multiplicity  of  names  given  to  a  single  star. 

"The Egyptians,  according  to  Plutarch,  thought  that  Her- 
cules had  his  seat  in  the  sun,  and  that  he  traveled  with  it 
around  the  moon.  The  author  of  the  hymns  ascribed  to  Or- 
pheus, fixes  still  more  strongly  the  identity  of  Hercules  with 
the  sun.  He  calls  Hercules  '  the  god  who  produced  time, 
whose  forms  vary,  the  father  of  all  things,  and  destroyer  of 
all.  He  is  the  god  who  brings  back  by  turns  Aurora  and 
the  night,  and  who,  moving  onward  from  east  to  west,  runs 
through  the  career  of  his  twelve  labors  ;  the  valiant  Titan, 
who  chases  away  maladies,  and  delivers  man  from  the  evils 
which  afflict  him. ' '  -  Antlwn. 3 

By  whatever  name  or  under  whatever  form  the  sun  was 
worshiped,  there  was  always  a  female  divinity  associated 
with  it.  Sometimes  this  female  was  the  moon,  sometimes 
the  earth,  sometimes  the  atmosphere,  and  at  other  times 
simply  the  female  principle  in  nature.  In  other  forms  it  was 
the  idea  of  a  male  and  female  blended  in  one,  as  in  the  case 
of  Baalim.  The  female  sometimes  appeared  as  the  wife  of 


2  Sun  worship,  with  that  of  the  other  heavenly  bodies,  continued  till  the  rise 

of  Mahomet.     The  father  of  Mahomet,  when  a  boy,  was  devoted  as  a  sacrifice  to 

the  sun,  but  fortunately  was  ransomed.    (See  Gibbon,  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap.  1, 

par.  9.)     It  was  from  the  horrors  of  sun-worship  that  Mahomet  turned  Arabia. 

3 "Classical  Dictionary,"  article  "Hercules." 


186  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

the  one  with  whom  she  was  worshiped  ;  sometimes  as  both 
the  sister  and  the  wife,  as  in  the  case  of  Osiris  ;  yet  again 
as  the  wife  of  some  other  god  ;  and  often  not  exactly  as  a 
wife  at  all,  but  simply  as  a  female  associate.  With  Osiris 
was  associated  Isis  ;  with  Baal,  Ashtaroth,  or  Astarte  ;  with 
Bel,  Mylitta  ;  with  Shamas,  Anunit ;  with  Adonis,  Venus ; 
with  Hercules,  Omphale ;  with  Apollo,  Diana  ;  with  Atys, 
Cybele.  Sometimes  they  were  worshiped  in  the  images  of 
the  male  and  female  human  figure ;  sometimes  in  the  form 
of  a  bull  and  a  heifer,  as  in  Osiris  and  Isis  ;  sometimes  in  a 
form  in  which  the  human  and  the  beast  were  blended  ;  some- 
times in  a  simple  carved  disc  for  the  male,  and  a  piece  of 
carved  wood  for  the  female,  as  in  some  forms  of  Baal  and 
Astarte  ;  sometimes  in  the  form  of  stones  which  had  fallen 
from  heaven,  but  mostly  in  the  form  of  cones  or  obelisks* 
which  they  themselves  had  shaped  to  represent  the  male,  and 
of  other  shapes  to  represent  the  female.  'And  yet  in  unison 
with  all  these  the  sun  itself  was  worshiped,  especially  at  its 
rising,  by  a  bow  or  prostration,  or  kissing  of  the  hand. 

In  none  of  these  forms,  however,  not  even  in  the  naked 
shining  sun,  was  it  the  literal  object  that  was  worshiped, 
but  certain  functions  or  powers,  of  which  these  were  but  the 
representations.  It  was  observed  that  the  sun  in  co-opera- 
tion with  the  earth  and  the  atmosphere  which  gave  rain, 
caused  all  manner  of  verdure  to  spring  forth  and  bear  its 
proper  fruit.  It  was  held,  therefore,  that  the  sun  was  the 
supreme  formative  power,  the  mighty  author  of  fruitfulness, 
and  that  the  greatest  and  most  glorious  manifestation  and 
exertion  of  his  powers  were  employed  in  reproduction.  Sun 
worship  was  therefore  nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  wor- 
ship of  the  principle  of  reproduction  in  man  and  nature. 
And  as  the  influence  of  the  real  sun  was  extended  over  and 
through  all  nature,  so  this  principle  was  extended  through 
all  worship. 

*  The  obelisk,  or  Cleopatra's  Needle,  brought  from  Egypt  and  now  standing 
in  Central  Park,  New  York  City,  is  one  of  these  stone  sun-images. 


APOLLO. 


DIANA   OF   THE   EPHESIANS. 


THE  RITES  OF  SUN  WORSHIP.  187 

"  All  paganism  is  at  bottom  a  worship  of  nature  in  some 
form  or  other,  and  in  all  pagan  religions  the  deepest  and 
most  awe-inspiring  attribute  of  nature  was  its  power  of  re- 
production. The  mystery  of  birth  and  becoming  was  the 
deepest  mystery  of  nature  ;  it  lay  at  the  root  of  all  thought- 
ful paganism,  and  appeared  in  various  forms,  some  of  a 
more  innocent,  others  of  a  most  debasing  type.  To  ancient 
pagan  thinkers,  as  well  as  to  modern  men  of  science,  the  key 
to  the  hidden  secret  of  the  origin  and  preservation  of  the 
universe,  lay  in  the  mystery  of  sex.  Two  energies  or 
agents,  one  an  active  and  generative,  the  other  a  feminine, 
passive,  or  susceptible  one,  were  everywhere  thought  to 
combine  for  creative  purposes  ;  and  heaven  and  earth,  sun 
and  moon,  day  and  night,  were  believed  to  co-operate  to 
the  production  of  being.  Upon  some  such  basis  as  this 
rested  almost  all  the  polytheistic  worship  of  the  old  civiliza- 
tion ;  and  to  it  may  be  traced  back,  stage  by  stage,  the  sepa- 
ration of  divinity  into  male  and  female  gods  ;  the  deification 
of  distinct  powers  of  nature,  and  the  idealization  of  man's 
own  faculties,  desires,  and  lusts  ;  where  every  power  of  his 
understanding  was  embodied  as  an  object  of  adoration,  and 
every  impulse  of  his  will  became  an  incarnation  of  deity. "  — 
' '  Encyclopedia  Britannica. " 5 

As  the  sun  was  the  great  god,  the  supreme  lord,  and 
as  he  exerted  his  most  glorious  powers  in  reproduction,  it 
was  held  to  be  the  most  acceptable  worship  for  his  devotees 
so  to  employ  themselves  and  their  powers.  Consequently 
prostitution  was  the  one  chief  characteristic  of  sun  worship 
wherever  found.  As  the  association  of  a  female  without 
reference  to  relationship  was  the  only  requirement  necessary 
to  worship,  the  result  was  the  perfect  confusion  of  all  rela- 
tionships among  the  worshipers,  even  to  the  mutual  inter- 
change of  garments  between  the  sexes.  In  the  eighteenth 
chapter  of  Leviticus  there  is  a  faithful  record  of  such  a  result 
among  the  sun  worshipers  of  the  land  of  Canaan  whom  the 

.  _  6  Article  "  Christianity," 


188  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

Lord  caused  to  be  blotted  from  the  earth.  The  prohibition 
in  Deuteronomy  xxii,  5  —  "  The  woman  shall  not  wear  that 
which  pertaineth  unto  a  man,  neither  shall  a  man  put  on  a 
woman's  garment  "  —  was  aimed  directly  at  this  practice  in 
sun  worship. 

The  sacrifice  of  virginity  was  the  most  acceptable  offer- 
ing that  ever  could  be  made  in  the  worship  of  the  sun. 
Indeed,  until  this  sacrifice  had  been  made,  no  other  offering 
was  acceptable.  One  ancient  writer  saw  the  manner  of  wor- 
ship of  Bel  and  Mylitta  in  Babylon,  and  has  left  a  record  of 
what  he  saw.  He  says  :  — 

"The  Babylonians  have  one  most  shameful  custom.  Every  woman 
born  in  the  country  must  once  in  her  life  go  and  sit  down  in  the  precinct 
of  Venus,  and  there  consort  with  a  stranger.  .  .  .  Venus  is  called  Mylitta 
by  the  Assyrians."  —  Herodotus.6 

Baal-peor,  by  whose  shameful  worship  Balaam  succeeded 
in  bringing  evil  upon  Israel  when  he  failed  in  his  own  ef- 
forts to  curse  them,  was  the  god  which  in  Moab  presided 
over  such  characters  as  above  described  by  Herodotus  in 
Babylon.  This  particular  system  of  worship  did  not  pre- 
vail outside  of  Egypt  and  the  Eastern  nations.  In  Greece 
and  Rome  the  worship  was  through  Bacchus,  Hercules, 
Apollo,  etc.,  and  was  more  in  the  form  of  festivals  —  mys- 
teries—  celebrated  with  obscene  symbols  and  in  most  lasciv- 
ious rites.  The  rites  of  Bacchus  are  thus  described  :  — 

"  The  worship  of  Bacchus  prevailed  in  almost  all  parts  of  Greece. 
Men  and  women  joined  in  his  festivals  dressed  in  Asiatic  robes  and  bon- 
nets, their  heads  wreathed  with  vine  and  ivy  leaves,  with  fawn  skins 
flung  over  their  shoulders,  and  thyrsi  or  blunt  spears  twined  with  vine 
leaves,  in  their  hands.  They  ran  through  the  country  shouting  lo 
Bacche!  Euoi  !  lacche!  etc.,  swinging  their  thyrsi,  beating  on  drums, 
and  sounding  various  instruments.  Indecent  emblems  were  carried  in 
procession,  and  the  ceremonies  often  assumed  a  most  immoral  character 
and  tendency.  The  women,  who  bore  a  chief  part  in  these,  frantic 
revels,  were  called  Bacchae,  Msenades,  Thyiades,  Euades,  etc."  — 
Anthon.1 

6  Book  i,  chap,  cxcix.  7"  Classical  Dictionary,"  Bacchus, 


BACCHUS. 


CYBELE. 


SUIT  WORSHIP  IN  THE  MYSTERIES.  189 

In  the  mysteries  Bacchus  was  identified  with  Osiris,  and 
was  worshiped  as  the  sun.  In  India,  Schiva  and  his  wor- 
ship were  identical  with  Bacchus  and  his  worship.  "The 
two  systems  of  worship  have  the  same  obscenities,  and  the 
same  emblems  of  the  generative  power."  —Anthon*  "An 
obscure  native  of  Greece  brought  first  to  Etruria,  and 
shortly  afterwards  to  the  more  congenial  soil  of  Rome,  the 
mysterious  orgies  of  Bacchus,  which  had  already  obtained 
an  infamous  celebrity  in  the  East.  The  horrible  wicked- 
nesses which  were  perpetrated  at  the  initiations,  at  which 
the  passions  of  the  youth  of  either  sex  were  inflamed  by 
wine  and  musio,  secresy  and  security,  had  been  practiced 
by  the  devotees  without  remorse  for  some  time,  before  they 
were  discovered.  .  .  .  The  Bacchanalia,  though  constantly 
interdicted,  continued  to  reappear  in  the  city."  —Merivale.9 

The  worship  of  the  Phrygian  Cybele  and  Atys  was  com- 
mon in  Greece  five  hundred  years  before  Christ,  and  was 
introduced  into  Rome  about  547  B.  c.,  when  an  embassy  was 
sent  to  the  king  of  Pergamus  to  ask  for  the  stone  which  rep- 
resented Cybele,  and  which  was  said  to  have  fallen  from 
heaven.  The  king  gave  up  the  stone,  which  was  taken  to 
Rome.  A  temple  was  built,  and  a  festival  established  in 
her  honor.  The  festival  was  called  Megalesia,  and  was 
celebrated  annually  in  the  early  part  of  April,  and  is  thus 
described  :  — 

"Like  Asiatic  worship  in  general,  that  of  Cybele  was  enthusiastic. 
Her  priests  named  Galli  and  Corybantes,  ran  about  with  dreadful  cries 
and  bowlings,  beating  on  timbrels,  clashing  cymbals,  sounding  pipes, 
and  cutting  their  flesh  with  knives.  The  box-tree  and  cypress  were 
considered  as  sacred  to  her,  as  from  the  former  she  made  the  pipes,  and 
Atys  was  said  to  have  been  changed  into  the  latter."  —  Anthon.1* 

The  universality  of  the  worship  of  the  sun  in  Hercules 
has  been  already  shown.  Of  the  manner  in  which  his  wor- 
ship was  conducted,  we  have  the  following  account :  — 

8  Id.          .'"  History  of  the  Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxii,  par.  19,  20. 
10  "  Classical  Dictionary,"  article  "  Cybele." 


190  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

"It  seems  to  have  beeii  marked  by  an  almost  delirious  sensuality. 
Married  and  unmarried  females  prostituted  themselves  at  the  festival  of 
the  gods.  The  two  sexes  changed  their  respective  characters  ;  and  tra- 
dition reported  that  Hercules  himself  had  given  an  example  of  this, 
when,  assuming  the  vestments  and  occupation  of  a  female,  he  subjected 
himself  to  the  service  of  the  voluptuous  Omphale.  The  Lydian  Hercules 
was  named  Sandon,  after  the  robe  dyed  with  sandyx,  in  which  Omphale 
had  arrayed  him,  and  which  the  females  of  the  country  imitated  in  cele- 
brating his  licentious  worship."  —  Anthon. n 

In  Rome  and  Italy,  "The  worship  of  Hercules  was  from 
an  early  date  among  the  most  widely  diffused  ;  he  was,  to 
use  the  words  of  an  ancient  author,  adored  in  every  hamlet 
of  Italy,  and  altars  were  everywhere  erected-  to  him  in  the 
streets  of  the  cities  and  along  the  country  roads."  — 
Mommsen. 12 

As  before  stated,  the  almost  numberless  forms  of  sun 
worship  were  practiced  in  Canaan.  In  the  practice  of  these 
fearful  abominations  they  had  so  corrupted  themselves  that 
in  the  expressive  figure  of  the  Scripture,  the  very  earth  had 
grown  so  sick  that  it  was  compelled  to  vomit  out  the  filthy 
inhabitants.  "The  land  is  defiled  :  therefore  I  do  visit  the 
iniquity  thereof  upon  it,  and  the  land  itself  vomiteth  out  her 
inhabitants."  Lev.  xviii,  25.  All  of  this  the  God  of 
heaven  taught  his  people  to  renounce.  "Ye  shall  there- 
fore keep  my  statutes  and  my  judgments,  and  shall  not 
commit  any  of  these  abominations  ;  neither  any  of  your 
own  nation,  nor  any  stranger  that  sojourneth  among  you  : 
(for  all  these  abominations  have  the  men  of  the  land  done, 
which  were  before  you,  and  the  land  is  defiled)  :  that  the 
land  spue  not  you  out  also,  when  ye  defile  it,  as  it  spued  out 
the  nations  that  were  before  you.  For  whosoever  shall 
commit  any  of  these  abominations,  even  the  souls  that  com- 
mit them  shall  be  cut  off  from  among  their  people.  There- 
fore shall  ye  keep  mine  ordinance,  that  ye  commit  not  any 
one  of  these  abominable  customs,  which  were  committed 

11  Id.,  "Hercules." 

12  "  History  of  Rome,"  book  i,  chap,  xii,  par.  25. 


JEHOVAH  CONDEMNS  8VN"  WORSHIP.  191 

before  you,  and  that  ye  defile  not  yourselves  therein  :  I  am 
the  Lord  your  God."  Lev,  xviii,  26-30. 1S 

In  all  these  prohibitions  the  people  were  taught  to 
shun  as  the  terrible  plague  that  it  was,  every  suggestion  of 
the  evil  influences  of  the  worship  of  the  sun.  They  were  to 
break  down  all  the  sun-images  and  carved  stocks  —  groves 
—  that  might  be  found  anywhere  in  all  the  land  which  the 
Lord  had  given  them.  See  Ex.  xxiii,  24  ;  xxxiii,  13,  14. 

In  yet  another  and  most  comprehensive  way  the  Lord 
taught  his  people  to  shun  every  indication  of  the  worship  of 
the  sun.  As  has  been  shown,  the  devotees  of  the  sun  wor- 
shiped with  their  faces  toward  the  east.  When  God  estab- 
lished his  worship  with  the  children  of  Israel  in  the  very  midst 
of  the  sun  worshiping  nations  round  about,  at  first  a  sanctuary 
was  built  and  afterwards  a  temple,  where  he  dwelt  by  the 
glory  of  his  presence.  To  the  door  of  this  sanctuary  every 
form  of  sacrifice  and  offering  was  to  be  brought,  and  there 
they  were  to  worship.  And  the  door  of  that  sanctuary 
(the  temple  also)  was  always  toward  the  east,  in  order  that 
all  who  would  sacrifice  to  Jehovah  and  worship  him,  would 
in  so  doing  turn  their  Txicks  upon  the  sun  and  its  worship  ; 
and  that  whoever  joined  in  the  worship  of  the  sun,  had  first 
to  turn  his  back  upon  Jehovah. 

Through  the  periods  of  the  judges  there  were  lapses  into 
sun  worship  among  the  children  of  Israel,  but  they  were 
restored  to  the  worship  of  the  Lord,  and  by  the  influence  of 
Samuel  and  David,  and  Solomon  in  his  early  days,  the 
whole  nation  was  separated  from  sun  worship  in  all  its 
forms,  and  united  in  the  pure  worship  of  Jehovah.  Yet  in 
his  later  years  Solomon  turned  from  the  Lord,  and  "loved 
many  strange  women,  together  with  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh, 
women  of  the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  Edomites,  Zidonians, 
and  Hittites  ;  of  the  nations  concerning  which  the  Lord  said 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,  Ye  shall  not  go  in  to  them, 
neither  shall  they  come  in  unto  you  :  for  surely  they  will 

13  Read  also  the  whole  of  Leviticus    chapters  xvlil,  xx. 


192  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

turn  away  your  heart  after  their  gods  :  Solomon  clave  unto 
these  in  love.  And  he  had  seven  hundred  wives,  princesses, 
and  three  hundred  concubines  :  and  his  wives  turned  away 
his  heart.  For  it  came  to  pass  when  Solomon  was  old, 
that  his  wives  turned  away  his  heart  after  other  gods  :  and 
his  heart  was  not  perfect  with  the  Lord  his  God,  as  was 
the  heart  of  David  his  father.  For  Solomon  went  after 
Ashtaroth  the  goddess  of  the  Zidonians,  and  after  Milcom 
the  abomination  of  the  Ammonites.  And  Solomon  did 
evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  and  went  not  fully  after 
the  Lord,  as  did  David  his  father.  Then  did  Solomon 
build  a  high  place  for  Chemosh,  the  abomination  of  Moab, 
in  the  hill  that  is  before  Jerusalem,  and  for  Molech,  the 
abomination  of  the  children  of  Ammon.  And  likewise  did 
he  for  all  his  strange  wives,  which  burnt  incense  and  sacri- 
ficed unto  their  gods."  1  Kings  xi,  1-8. 

After  the  death  of  Solomon,  the  ten  tribes  separated 
themselves  from  Judah  and  Benjamin,  and  under  the  king- 
ship, and  by  the  direction,  of  Jeroboam,  established  a  false 
worship  through  the  two  golden  calves  copied  from  Egypt, 
one  of  which  was  placed  in  Bethel  and  the  other  in  Dan. 
Each  of  the  successors  of  Jeroboam  walked  in  the  way  of 
Jeroboam  "and  in  his  sin  wherewith  he  made  Israel  to  sin," 
unto  the  time  of  Omri,  who  in  this  wicked  way  ' '  did  worse 
than  all  that  were  before  him. "  ' '  And  Ahab  the  son  of 
Omri  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  above  all  that  were 
before  him.  And  it  came  to  pass  as  if  it  had  been  a  light 
thing  for  him  to  walk  in  the  sins  of  Jeroboam  the  son  of 
Nebat,  that  he  took  to  wife  Jezebel,  the  daughter  of  Eth- 
baal,  king  of  the  Zidonians,  and  went  and  served  Baal,  and 
worshiped  him.  And  he  reared  up  an  altar  for  Baal  in  the 
house  of  Baal,  which  he  had  built  in  Samaria.  And  Ahab 
made  a  grove  ;  and  Ahab  did  more  to  provoke  the  Lord 
God  of  Israel  to  anger  than  all  the  kings  of  Israel  that  were 
before  him."  1  Kings  xvi,  30-33. 


VENUS. 


ASTARTE. 


BUN  WORSHIP  IN  JUDAH.  193 

From  this  it  is  evident  that  as  corrupt  and  degrading  as 
was  the  worship  established  by  Jeroboam,  that  of  the  sun 
was  far  worse.  Ethbaal  was  a  priest  of  Baal  and  Astarte, 
who  assassinated  the  king  and  made  himself  king  in  his 
stead.  Jezebel  brought  with  her  into  Israel  the  worship  of 
Baal  and  Astarte, — the  male  and  female  sun, —  and  estab- 
lished it  to  such  an  extent  that  in  a  few  years  there  were 
four  hundred  and  fifty  prophets  of  Baal  and  four  hundred 
of  Astarte,  and  only  seven  thousand  people  in  all  Israel 
who  had  not  joined  in  the  wicked  worship.  Elijah  began  a 
reformation,  but  the  worship  and  the  gods  introduced  by 
Jezebel  remained  in  some  measure  till  the  reign  of  Jehu, 
who  gathered  every  worshiper  of  Baal  to  a  general  assembly 
in  honor  of  Baal,  and  slew  them  all.  "And  they  brought 
forth  the  images  out  of  the  house  of  Baal,  and  burned 
them.  And  they  brake  down  the  image  of  Baal,  and  brake 
down  the  house  of  Baal,  and  made  it  a  draught  house  unto 
this  day.  Thus  Jehu  destroyed  Baal  out  of  Israel.  How- 
beit  from  the  sins  of  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat,  who  made 
Israel  to  sin,  Jehu  departed  not  from  after  them,  to  wit,  the 
golden  calves  that  were  in  Bethel  and  that  were  in  Dan." 
2  Kings  x,  26-29. 

Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  married 
Jehoram,  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah,  and  with 
her,  sun  worship  through  Baal  and  Ashtaroth  was  introduced 
into  the  kingdom  of  Judah  ;  for  Jehoram  ' '  walked  in  the 
way  of  the  kings  of  Israel,  as  did  the  house  of  Ahab  ;  for 
the  daughter  of  Ahab  was  his  wife  :  and  he  did  evil  in  the 
sight  of  the  Lord."  2  Kings  viii,  18.  This  worship  of 
Baalim  continued  till  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  who  ' '  brake  the 
images  [sun  images]  in  pieces,  and  cut  down  the  groves 
[Asheras,  representations  of  Ashtaroth],  and  threw  down  the 
high  places  and  the  altars  out  of  all  Judah  and  Benjamin." 
2  Chron.  xxxi,  1.  By  Manasseh,  however,  this  worship  was 
all  restored  in  its  fullest  extent ;  ' '  for  he  built  again  the 


194  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

high  places  which  Hezekiah  his  father  had  broken  down, 
and  he  reared  up  altars  for  Baalim,  and  made  groves,  and 
worshiped  all  the  host  of  heaven,  and  served  them.  Also 
he  built  altars  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  whereof  the  Lord 
had  said,  In  Jerusalem  shall  my  name  be  forever.  And  he 
built  altars  for  all  the  host  of  heaven  in  the  two  courts  of  the 
house  of  the  Lord.  And  he  caused  his  children  to  pass 
through  the  fire  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom  :  also  he 
observed  times  and  used  enchantments,  and  used  witchcraft, 
and  dealt  with  a  familiar  spirit,  and  with  wizards  :  he  wrought 
much  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  to  provoke  him  to  anger. 
And  he  set  a  carved  image,  the  idol  which  he  had  made  in 
the  house  of  God  of  which  God  had  said  to  David  and  to 
Solomon  his  son,  In  this  house  and  in  Jerusalem,  which  I 
have  chosen  before  all  the  tribes  of  Israel,  will  I  put  my 
name  forever."  2  Chron.  xxxiii,  3-7. 

This  image  which  he  set  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  was 
rather  a  double  image  of  Baal  and  Ashtaroth,  which  he  put 
up  above  the  altars  of  Baal  in  the  house  of  the  Lord.  The 
cloisters  about  the  temple  were  used  as  stables  for  the 
horses  which  were  dedicated  to  the  sun.  By  the  side  of  the 
temple  he  built  houses  for  the  priests  and  priestesses  of  the 
Baalim,  where  the  women  wove  hangings  for  the  figures  of 
Astarte. 

Happily,  Manasseh  was  succeeded  by  Josiah,  who  anni- 
hilated this  whole  system.  "For  in  the  eighth  year  of  his 
reign,  while  he  was  yet  young,  he  began  to  seek  after  the 
God  of  David  his  father  :  and  in  the  twelfth  year  he  began 
to  purge  Judah  and  Jerusalem  from  the  high  places,  and  the 
groves,  and  the  carved  images,  and  the  molten  images. 
And  they  brake  down  the  altars  of  Baalim  in  his  presence  ; 
and  the  images  that  were  on  high  above  them  he  cut  down  ; 
and  the  groves,  and  the  carved  images,  and  the  molten  im- 
ages he  brake  in  pieces  and  made  dust  of  them,  and  strewed 
it  upon  the  graves  of  them  that  had  sacrificed  unto  them." 


SUN  WORSHIP  DESTROYS   THE  KINGDOM.          195 

"And  he  brake  down  the  houses  of  the  sodomites,  that 
were  by  the  house  of  the  Lord,  where  the  -women  wove 
hangings  for  the  grove.  And  he  brought  all  the  priests  out 
of  the  cities  of  Judah  and  defiled  the  high  places  where  the 
priests  had  burned  incense,  from  Geba  to  Beer-sheba,  and 
brake  down  the  high  places  of  the  gates  that  were  in  the  en- 
tering in  of  the  gate  of  Joshua,  the  governor  of  the  city, 
which  were  on  a  man's  left  hand  at  the  gate  of  the  city. 
.  .  .  And  he  defiled  Topheth,  which  is  in  the  valley  of  the 
children  of  Hinnom,  that  no  man  might  make  his  son  or  his 
daughter  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech.  And  he  took 
away  the  horses  that  the  kings  of  Judah  had  given  to  the 
sun,  at  the  entering  in  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  by  the 
chamber  of  Nathan-melech  the  chamberlain,  which  was  in 
the  suburbs,  and  burned  the  chariots  of  the  sun  with  fire. 
And  the  altars  that  were  on  the  top  of  the  upper  chamber  of 
Ahaz,  which  the  kings  of  Judah  had  made,  and  the  altars 
which  Manasseh  had  made  in  the  two  courts  of  the  house  of 
the  Lord,  did  the  king  beat  down,  and  brake  them  down 
from  thence,  and  cast  the  dust  of  them  into  the  brook 
Kidron."  2  Chron.  xxxiv,  3,  4  ;  2  Kings  xxiii,  7-12. 

Yet  by  the  time  that  Zedekiah  reigned,  there  was  again  a 
serious  lapse  not  only  into  certain  forms  of  sun  worship,  but 
into  the  open  worship  of  the  literal  sun.  Ezekiel  was  among 
the  captives  in  Babylonia,  and  by  the  Spirit  of  God  he  was 
taken  in  a  vision  to  Jerusalem,  and  was  caused  to  see  the 
abominations  that  were  being  practiced  there.  First,  he 
was  caused  to  see  the  image  of  Jealousy  in  the  very  entry 
way  to  the  altar  of  sacrifice,  before  the  house  of  the  Lord. 

He  was  told  to  turn,  and  he  would  see  greater  abominations 
than  this.  He  then  saw,  "  and  behold  every  form  of  creep- 
ing things,  and  abominable  beasts,  and  all  the  idols  of  the 
house  of  Israel,  portrayed  upon  the  wall  round  about.  And 
there  stood  before  them  seventy  men  of  the  ancients  of  the 
bouse  of  Israel,  and  in  the  midst  of  them  stood  Jaazaniah 


196  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

the  son  of  Shaphan,  with  every  man  his  censer  in  his  hand  ; 
and  a  thick  cloud  of  incense  went  up." 

Again  he  was  told  to  turn,  and  he  would  see  yet  greater 
abominations  than  this  that  they  were  doing.  He  was  then 
brought  "to  the  door  of  the  gate  of  the  Lord's  house  which 
was  toward  the  north  ;  and,  behold,  there  sat  women  weep- 
ing for  Tammuz. " 

And  he  was  told  to  turn  yet  again,  and  he  should  see 
greater  abominations  even  than  this.  ' '  And  he  brought  me 
into  the  inner  court  of  the  Lord's  house,  and,  behold,  at  the 
door  of  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  between  the  porch  and  the 
altar,  were  about  five  and  twenty  men,  with  their  backs  to- 
ward the  temple  of  the  Lord,  and  their  faces  toward  the  east, 
and  they  worshiped  the  sun  toward  the  east. "  Eze.  viii,  16. 

All  that  is  meant  in  this  we  cannot  tell  ;  but  this  much 
is  certain,  that,  in  the  estimate  of  Jehovah,  as  bad  as  was 
the  worship  of  Astarte,  and  however  much  it  provoked  to 
jealousy  ;  as  bad  as  was  the  worship  of  all  manner  of 
abominable  beasts  ;  as  bad  as  was  the  worship  of  Tammuz  ; 
yet  worse  than  all  these,  even  though  in  them  were  embod- 
ied some  forms  of  sun  worship  —  more  abominable  than  all 
these  was  the  setting  of  the  face  toward  the  east,  in  the 
worship  of  the  sun  itself.  This  was  to  turn  the  hack  upon 
the  Lord;  to  leave  him  and  his  worship  behind  ;  and,  in 
worshiping  the  visible  sun,  to  choose  all  that  was  included 
in  all  the  forms  of  its  worship  that  might  be  known.  This 
was  open  apostasy  —  the  renunciation  of  all  that  was  good 
and  the  acceptance  of  all  that  was  bad. 

Now,  aside  from  the  lascivious  rites  of  Bacchus  and  Her- 
cules, and  beyond  the  fearful  orgies  of  Cybele,  this  very 
form  of  worship  prevailed  in  the  Roman  empire.  The  wor- 
ship of  the  sun  itself  was  the  principal  worship  of  the  Rom- 
ans in  the  time  of  Constantine.  The  sun,  as  represented  in 
Apollo,  was  the  chief  and  patron  divinity  recognized  by 
Augustus.  "Apollo  was  the  patron  of  the  spot  which  had 


WEEPING  FOR  TAMMUZ. 


ASHERES   (GROVES). 


SUN  WORSHIP  OF  AUGUSTUS  AND   ELAOABALUS.     1<)~ 

given  a  name  to  his  great  victory  of  Actium  ;  Apollo  him- 
self, it  was  proclaimed,  had  fought  for  Rome  and  for 
Octavius  on  that  auspicious  day  ;  the  same  Apollo,  the  sun- 
god,  had  shuddered  in  his  bright  career  at  the  murder  of 
the  dictator,  and  had  terrified  the  nations  by  the  eclipse  of 
his  divine  countenance.  .  .  .  Besides  building  a  splendid 
temple  to  Apollo  on  the  Palatine  Hill,  the  emperor  sought 
to  honor  him  by  transplanting  to  the  Circus  Maximus,  the 
sports  of  which  were  under  his  special  protection,  an  obelisk 
from  Heliopolis  [city  of  the  sun]  in  Egypt.  This  flame- 
shaped  column  was  a  symbol  of  the  sun,  and  originally  bore 
a  blazing  orb  upon  its  summit." — Merivale.11 

To  Sol  Deus  inmctus  —  the  sun,  the  unconquerable  god  — 
were  attributed  the  world-wide  conquests  of  the  Roman  power. 
The  greatest  and  most  magnificent  temple  that  ever  was 
built  on  earth,  except  only  that  built  by  Solomon,  was 
erected  by  Antoninus  Pius,  emperor  of  Rome,  at  Baalbek, 
in  honor  of  the  visible  shining  sun. 

But  it  was  in  Elagabalus  that  the  worship  of  the  sun 
received  its  strongest  imperial  impetus.  The  way  that  he 
became  emperor  was  this :  The  emperor  Caracalla  was 
murdered  near  Antioch,  March  8,  A.  D.  217,  and  there 
Macrinus  became  emperor  in  his  stead.  Caracalla's  mother 
committed  suicide  shortly  afterward,  and  then  Macrinus 
commanded  Julia  Maesa,  her  sister,  to  leave  Antioch  with 
her  family.  She  went  to  Emesa  where  a  considerable  body 
of  troops  was  stationed,  and  where  was  a  temple  of  the  sun 
which  the  troops  frequented  in  their  worship.  Julia's  grand- 
son, Bassianus,  was  made  high-priest  of  the  sun  in  this 
temple.  In  this  young  man  the  troops  "  recognized,  or 
thought  they  recognized,  the  features  of  Caracalla."  Julia 
took  particular  pains,  by  the  careful  distribution  of  money, 
to  deepen  this  impression,  and  May  16,  218,  he  was  declared 
emperor  by  the  troops  at  Emesa.  He  asserted  his  hereditary 
right  to  the  office  because  of  his  relationship  to  Caracalla. 

14 "Romans  Under  the  Empire,"  chap,  xxxiii,  par.  13. 
18 


198  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

The  rebellion  rapidly  spread  among  the  troops  throughout 
the  province.  Officers  who  tried  to  check  it  were  murdered, 
and  the  power  of  young  Bassianus  daily  grew. 

Macrinus  assembled  his  troops,  and  left  Antioch  to  quell 
the  insurrection.  A  battle  was  fought,  and  Macrinus  was 
slain,  thus  ending  a  reign  of  eighty-seven  days,  and  Bassia- 
ims  became  emperor  in  fact,  June  7,  A.  D.  218.  He  assumed 
the  name  of  Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus,  and  sent  letters  to 
the  Senate  announcing  his  accession  to  the  empire  in  the 
place  of  Macrinus.  Not  being  ready  just  then  to  go  to 
Rome  personally,  he  sent  a  picture  of  himself  which  he 
commanded  to  be  placed  in  the  Senate  house  over  the  altar 
of  victory.  "He  was  drawn  in  his  sacerdotal  robes  of  silk 
and  gold,  after  the  loose  flowing  fashion  of  the  Medes  and 
Phenicians  ;  his  head  was  covered  with  a  lofty  tiara,  his 
numerous  collars  and  bracelets  were  adorned  with  gems  of 
an  inestimable  value.  His  eyebrows  were  tinged  with  black, 
and  his  cheeks  painted  with  an  artificial  red  and  white." — 
Gibbon.™ 

The  name  under  which  the  sun  was  worshiped  at  Einesa, 
where  Bassiauus  was  high-priest,  was  Elagabalus.  His  acces- 
sion to  the  office  of  emperor  he  attributed  to  the  favor  of 
this  sun-god.  Therefore  as  emperor  he  assumed  the  name 
of  Elagabalus  as  greater  and  more  honorable  than  any  that 
might  be  derived  from  any  other  source,  and  by  this  name 
alone  is  he  known  in  history. 

When  he  went  to  Rome,  the  "black  conical  stone  "  from 
Emesa,  the  symbol  of  the  functions  of  the  sun,  was  taken 
with  him.  and  as  he  moved  "  in  a  solemn  procession  through 
the  streets  of  Rome,  the  way  was  strewed  with  gold  dust ;  the 
black  stone,  set  in  precious  gems,  was  placed  on  a  chariot 
drawn  by  six  milk-white  horses  richly  caparisoned.  The 
pious  emperor  held  the  reins,  and  supported  by  his  ministers, 
moved  slowly  backwards,  that  he  might  perpetually  enjoy 
the  felicity  of  the  divine  presence.  In  a  magnificent  temple 

15  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  vi,  par.  22. 


ELACiABALUS. 


AVREfJAN'8   TEMPLE    TO    THE  SUN.  199 

raised  on  the  Palatine  Mount,  the  sacrifices  of  the  god  Ela- 
gabalus  were  celebrated  with  every  circumstance  of  cost 
and  solemnity.  The  richest  wines,  the  most  extraordinary 
victims,  and  the  rarest  aromatics,  were  profusely  consumed 
on  his  altar.  Around  the  altar  a  chorus  of  Syrian  damsels 
performed  their  lascivious  dances  to  the  sound  of  barbarian 
music. " —  Gibbon. 16 

It  was  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  rites  of  sun  worship 
everywhere  that  all  the  laws  of  nature  and  decency  should 
"be  violated  and  subverted  by  Elagabalus  ;  that  he  should 
have  a  long  train  of  concubines,  and  a  rapid  succession  of 
wives  ;  that  a  vestal  virgin  should  be  taken  by  force  from 
her  sacred  retreat  to  feed  his  passion  ;  and  that  he  should 
put  on  the  dress,  and  play  the  part,  of  a  woman,  while  he 
publicly  assigned  to  another  the  title  and  the  place  of  hus- 
band to  himself.  All  these  things  belonged  with  the  worship 
of  the  sun,  and  all  this  Elagabalus  did,  not  as  emperor,  but 
as  imperial  high-priest  and  representative  of  the  sun.  As 
emperor  and  high-priest  of  the  sun,  it  was  his  chief  purpose, 
and  "it  was  openly  asserted,  that  the  worship  of  the  sun, 
under  his  name  of  Elagabalus,  was  to  supercede  all  other 
worship. "  —  Milman . " 

As  soon  as  Aurelian  became  emperor,  March,  A.  D.  270, 
he  began  the  erection  of  a  temple  in-  Rome  in  honor  of  the 
sun.  In  A.  D.  272  he  made  an  expedition  against  Zenobia, 
who  had  established  her  authority  in  the  East  with  her 
capital  at  Baalbek.  When  he  had  overthrown  her  power 
and  captured  her  capital  city,  he  left  an  officer  with  a  garri- 
son of  troops  to  govern  the  city  while  he  returned  to  Europe. 
The  people^  arose  and  murdered  the  governor  and  his  sol- 
diers. Aurelian  returned  and  gave  up  the  people  to  indis- 
criminate massacre,  and  made  of  the  city  itself  a  heap  of 
ruins.  The  only  attempt  he  made  to  repair  it  was  to  restore 
the  temple  of  the  sun,  which  Antoninus  had  built.  When 
he  returned  to  Koine  in  A.  D.  274,  he  celebrated  a  triumph, 

16 Id.,  par.  23.  "  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  viii,  par.  22. 


200  ANCIENT  SUN  WORSHIP. 

which,  in  magnificence  and  the  abundance  of  treasures,  was 
second  to  none  that  Rome  had  ever  seen.  At  this  time  also 
he  dedicated  his  magnificent  temple  to  the  sun. 

"A  considerable  portion  of  his  oriental  spoils  was  con- 
secrated to  the  gods  of  Rome  ;  the  Capitol,  and  every  other 
temple,  glittered  with  the  offerings  of  his  ostentatious  piety  ; 
and  the  temple  of  the  sun  alone  received  above  fifteen  thou- 
sand pounds  of  gold.  This  last  was  a  magnificent  structure, 
erected  by  the  emperor  on  the  side  of  the  Quirinal  Hill,  and 
dedicated  soon  after  the  triumph,  to  that  deity  whom  Aure- 
lian  adored  as  the  parent  of  his  life  and  fortunes.  His 
mother  had  been  an  inferior  priestess  in  a  chapel  of  the  sun  ; 
a  peculiar  devotion  to  the  god  of  light,  was  a  sentiment 
which  the  fortunate  peasant  imbibed  in  his  infancy ;  and 
every  step  of  his  elevation,  every  victory  of  his  reign,  forti- 
fied superstition  by  gratitude." — Gribbon.™ 

The  immediate  predecessor  of  the  emperor  Diocletian 
died  on  his  way  from  Persia  to  Europe.  The  fact  of  his 
death  was  concealed  from  the  army  for  a  time,  which  gave 
rise  to  a  strong  suspicion  that  he  had  been  murdered. 
When  Diocletian  was  chosen  emperor,  he  therefore  deemed 
it  necessary  to  purge  himself  of  all  suspicion  by  a  means 
which  would  prove  satisfactory  to  all.  He  did  it  by  a 
solemn  oath  in  the  face  of  the  sun.  "Conscious  that  the 
station  which  he  had  filled,  exposed  him  to  some  suspicions, 
Diocletian  ascended  the  tribunal,  and  raising  his  eyes 
towards  the  sun,  made  a  solemn  profession  of  his  own  inno- 
cence, in  the  presence  of  that  all-seeing  deity. "-—  (ribbon.19 
And  it  was  the  oracle  of  the  sun  —  Apollo  —  at  Miletus, 
which  he  consulted  before  he  issued  the  decree  of  persecu- 
tion, to  which  he  was  so  strongly  urged  by  Galerius,  wrho 
was  prompted  by  his  mother,  a  fanatical  worshiper  of 
Cybele. 

But  it  was  in  Constantine  that,  after  Elagabalus,  the  sun 
found  its  most  worshipful  devotee.  As  emperor  of  Rome 

18  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xi,  par.  43.  19/d.,  chap,  xii,  par.  41. 


CONSTANTINE  A    WORSHIPER    OF   THE  SUN.         201 

he  had  to  show  some  deference  to  the  other  gods,  and  there- 
fore on  the  medals  which  were  issued  in  honor  of  his  vic- 
tories, there  were  the  figures  of  Jupiter  and  MarS,  as  well  as 
of  Hercules  and  Apollo.  Up  to  the  period  of  his  war  with 
Maxentius,  A.  D.  812,  "all  that  we  know  of  Constantine's 
religion  would  imply  that  he  was  outwardly,  and  even  zeal- 
ously, pagan.  In  a  public  oration,  his  panegyrist  extols  the 
magnificence  of  his  offerings  to  the  gods.  His  victorious 
presence  was  not  merely  expected  to  restore  more  than  their 
former  splendor  to  the  Gaulish  cities  ruined  by  barbaric 
incursions,  but  sumptuous  temples  were  to  arise  at  his  bid- 
ding, to  propitiate  the  deities,  particularly  Apollo,  his  tute- 
lary god.  The  medals  struck  for  these  victories  are  covered 
with  the  symbols  of  paganism.  Eusebius  himself  admits 
that  Constantino  was  at  this  time  in  doubt  which  religion  he 
should  embrace. " — Oilman.20 

Thus  as  emperor,  and  to  satisfy  the  prejudices  of  the 
people,  some  respectful  deference  was  shown  to  other  gods, 
but  "the  devotion  of  Constantine  was  more  peculiarly 
directed  to  the  genius  of  the  sun,  the  Apollo  of  Greek  and 
Roman  mythology  ;  and  he  was  pleased  to  be  represented 
with  the  symbols  of  the  god  of  light  and  poetry.  The 
unerring  shafts  of  that  deity,  the  brightness  of  his  eyes,  his 
laurel  wreath,  immortal  beauty,  and  elegant  accomplish- 
ments, seemed  to  point  him  out  as  the  patron  of  a  young 
hero.  The  altars  of  Apollo  were  crowned  with  the  votive 
offerings  of  Constantine  ;  and  the  credulous  multitude  were 
taught  to  believe  that  the  emperor  was  permitted  to  behold 
with  mortal  eyes  the  visible  majesty  of  their  tutelar  deity  ; 
and  that,  either  waking  or  in  a  vision,  he  was  blessed  with 
the  auspicious  omens  of  a  long  and  victorious  reign.  The 
sun  was  universally  celebrated  as  the  invincible  guide  and 
protector  of  Constantine."  —(ribbon.*1 

In  the  time  of  Constantine,  and  in  Constantine  himself, 

ao  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  36. 
21  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xx,  par.  3. 


202 


ANCIENT  SUN   WORSHIP. 


the  worship  of  the  sun  occupied  the  imperial  seat,  and  was 
the  imperial  religion  of  Home.  It  will  be  necessary  in 
another  chapter  to  trace  the  same  thing  among  the  people  of 
the  empire. 


THE  SUN. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


THE  FALLING  AWAY  — THE  GREAT  APOSTASY.     . 

WHEN  Paul  was  at  Thessalonica,  he  preached  to  the  peo- 
ple about  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord.  After  he 
had  gone  away,  he  wrote  to  them  a  letter  in  which  he  said 
more  about  this  same  event,  and  in  his  writing  he  made  it 
so  much  of  a  reality,  and  his  hope  was  so  centered  in 
the  event,  that  apparently  he  put  himself  among  those  who 
would  see  the  Saviour  come,  and  wrote  as  though  he  and 
others  would  be  alive  at  that  time.  He  wrote:  "For  this 
we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  we  which  are 
alive  and  remain  unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord  shall  not  pre- 
vent [go  before]  them  which  are  asleep.  For  the  Lord  him- 
self shall  descend  from  heaven  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of 
the  archangel,  and  with  the  trump  of  God  :  and  the  dead  in 
Christ  shall  rise  first :  then  we  which  are  alive  and  remain 
shall  be  caught  up  together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to 
meet  the  Lord  in  the  air  ;  and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the 
Lord."  1  Thess.  iv,  15-17. 

The  Thessalonians  not  bearing  in  mind  what  he  had  told 
them  when  he  was  there,  misinterpreted  these  strong  and 
apparently  personal  statements,  and  therefore  put  into  the 
apostle's  words  a  meaning  that  he  did  not  intend  should  be 
there.  Upon  this  they  fell  into  the  mistake  of  supposing 
that  the  second  coining  of  Christ  was  immediately  at  hand, 
and  was  so  near  that  they  could  even  live  without  working 
until  he  should  come.  This  idea  had  been  worked  up  quite 
fully  among  them  by  persons  pretending  to  have  received 

[203] 


204       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

revelations  by  the  Spirit ;  by  others  pretending  that  they 
had  received  word  from  Paul  to  that  effect ;  and  yet  others 
went  so  far  as  to  write  letters  to  that  effect,  and  forge  Paul's 
name  to  them.  These  facts  coming  to  the  apostle's  knowl- 
edge, he  wrote  a  second  letter  to  correct  the  mistakes  which, 
in  view  of  the  teaching  he  had  given  when  he  was  present 
with  them,  they  were  wholly  unwarranted  in  making. 

In  his  second  letter  Paul  did  not  modify  in  the  least  the 
doctrine  that  Christ  is  coming,  or  that  he  will  then  certainly 
gather  his  people  to  himself.  There  wras  no  mistake  in  the 
doctrine  concerning  the  fact  of  his  coming.  The  mistake 
was  in  the  time  when  they  expected  him  to  come.  This  is 
the  point  which  the  apostle  corrects  in  his  second  letter, 
and  writes  thus  :  ' '  Now  we  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the 
coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering 
together  unto  him,  that  ye  be  not  soon  shaken  in  mind,  or 
be  troubled,  neither  by  spirit,  nor  by  word,  nor  by  letter  as 
from  us,  as  that  the  day  of  Christ  is  at  hand.  Let  no  man 
deceive  you  by  any  means  :  for  that  day  shall  not  come, 
except  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and  that  man  of  sin 
be  revealed,  the  son  of  perdition  ;  who  opposeth  and  exalteth 
himself  above  all  that  is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshiped ; 
so  that  he  as  God  sitteth  in  the  temple  of  God,  showing  him- 
self that  he  is  God.  Remember  ye  not,  that,  when  I  was 
yet  with  *you.  I  told  you  these  things  ?  And  now  ye  know 
what  withholdeth  that  he  might  be  revealed  in  his  time. 
For  the  mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work  :  only  he  who 
now  letteth  will  let,  until  he  be  taken  out  of  the  way.  And 
then  shall  that  Wicked  be  revealed,  whom  the  Lord  shall 
consume  with  the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  shall  destroy  with 
the  brightness  of  his  coming."  2  Thess.  ii,  1-8. 

All  this  he  had  taught  them  when  he  was  there  with 
them,  and  therefore  reminded  them,  in  the  fifth  verse,  "Re- 
member ye  not,  that,  when  I  was  yet  with  you,  I  told  you 
these  things  ? "  Then,  having  recalled  to  their  minds  the 
fact,  he  simply  appeals  to  their  knowledge,  and  says,  "And 


THE  ROOT   OF    THE  APOSTASY.  205 

now  ye  know  what  withholdeth  that  he  [the  son  of  perdi- 
tion] might  be  revealed  in  his  time."  This  plainly  sets 
forth  the  prophecy  of  a  great  falling  away  or  apostasy  from 
the  truth  of  the  gospel.  '  The  purity  of  the  gospel  of  Christ 
would  be  corrupted,  and  its  intent  perverted. 

The  falling  away  of  which  Paul  wrote  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  is  referred  to  in  his  counsel  to  the  elders  of  the 
church  at  Ephesus,  whom  he  called  to  meet  him  at  Miletus. 
To  them  he  said  :  "  For  I  know  this,  that  after  my  departing 
shall  grievous  wolves  enter  in  among  you,  not  sparing  the 
flock.  Also  of  your  own  selves  shall  men  arise,  speaking 
perverse  things,  to  draw  away  disciples  after  them.  There- 
fore watch,  and  remember,  that  by  the  space  of  three  years 
I  ceased  not  to  warn  every  one  night  and  day  with  tears." 
Acts  xx,  29-31. 

This  warning  was  not  alone  to  the  people  of  Ephesus  in 
the  three  years  that  he  was  there.  It  is  seen  through  all  his 
epistles.  Because  of  this  readiness  of  individuals  to  assert 
themselves,  to  get  wrong  views  of  the  truth,  and  to  speak 
perverse  things,  the  churches  had  constantly  to  be  checked, 
guided,  trained,  reproved,  and  rebuked.  There  were  men 
even  in  the  church  who  were  ever  ready  to  question  the 
authority  of  the  apostles.  There  were  those  who  made  it  a 
business  to  follow  up  Paul,  and  by  every  possible  means 
to  counteract  his  teaching  and  destroy  his  influence.  They 
declared  that  he  was  not  an  apostle  of  the  Lord  at  all,  but 
of  men  ;  that  he  had  never  seen  the  Lord  ;  that  he  was 
simply  a  tent  maker  going  about  over  the  country  working 
at  his  trade,  and  passing  himself  off  as  an  apostle.  Others 
charged  him  with  teaching  the  doctrine  that  it  is  right  to  do 
evil  that  good  may  come. 

But  it  was  not  alone  nor  chiefly  from  these  characters  that 
the  danger  threatened.  It  was  those  who  from  among 
the  disciples  would  arise  speaking  perverse  tMnf/x,  of  which 
an  instance  and  a  warning  are  given  in  the  letter  to  Timo- 
thy :  "  Study  to  show  thyself  approved  unto  God,  a  workman 


206       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

that  needeth  not  to  be  ashamed,  rightly  dividing  the  word  of 
truth.  But  shun  profane  and  vain  babblings  ;  for  they  will 
increase  unto  more  ungodliness.  And  their  word  will  eat  as 
doth  a  canker  ;  of  whom  is  Hymeireus  and  Philetus  ;  who 
concerning  the  truth  have  erred,  saying  that  the  resurrection 
is  past  already  ;  and  overthrow  the  faith  of  some."  2  Tim. 
ii,  15-18. 

Nor  yet  was  it  with  such  as  these  that  the  greatest  danger 
lay.  It  was  from  those  who  would  arise  not  only  speaking 
perverse  things,  but  "  speaking  perverse  things  to  draw  away 
disciples  after  them."  Through  error  of  judgment,  a  man 
might  speak  perverse  things  with  no  bad  intention  ;  but  the 
ones  here  mentioned  would  speak  perverse  things  purposely 
and  with  the  intention  of  making  disciples  for  themselves  — 
to  draw  away  disciples  after  them  instead  of  to  draw  disci- 
ples to  Christ.  These  would  pervert  the  truth,  and  would 
have  to  pervert  the  truth,  in  order  to  accomplish  their  pur- 
pose. He  who  always  speaks  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  will 
draw  disciples  to  Jesus  and  not  to  himself.  To  draw  to 
Christ  will  be  his  only  wish.  But  when  one  seeks  to  draw 
disciples  to  himself,  and  puts  himself  in  the  place  of  Christ, 
then  he  must  pervert  the  truth,  and  accommodate  it  to  the 
wishes  of  those  whom  he  hopes  to  make  his  own  disciples. 
This  is  wickedness  ;  this  is  apostasy. 

There  was  another  consideration  which  made  the  danger 
the  more  imminent.  These  words  were  spoken  to  the  bish- 
ops. It  was  a  company  of  bishops,  to  whom  the  apostle  was 
speaking  when  he  said:  "Of  your  own  selves  shall  men 
arise  speaking  perverse  things  to  draw  away  disciples  after 
them."  From  that  order  of  men  who  were  chosen  to  guide 
and  to  care  for  the  church  of  Christ,  from  those  who  were 
set  to  protect  the  church  —  from  this  order  of  men  there 
would  be  those  who  would  pervert  their  calling,  their  office, 
and  the  purpose  of  it,  to  build  up  themselves,  and  gather 
disciples  to  themselves  in  the  place  of  Christ.  To  watch 
this  spirit,  to  check  its  influence,  and  to  guard  against  its 


HEATHEN  RITES  ADOPTED.  9Q7 

workings,  was  the  constant  effort  of  the  apostle  ;  and  for  the 
reason  as  stated  to  the  Thessalonians,  that  the  mystery  of 
iniquity  was  already  working.  There  were  at  that  time 
elements  abroad  which  the  apostle  could  plainly  see  would 
develop  into  all  that  the  Scriptures  had  announced.  And 
scarcely  were  the  last  of  the  apostles  dead  when  the  evil 
appeared  in  its  practical  workings. 

No  sooner  were  the  apostles  removed  from  the  stage 
of  action,  no  sooner  was  their  watchful  attention  gone, 
and  their  apostolic  authority  removed,  than  this  very  thing 
appeared  of  which  the  apostle  had  spoken.  Certain  bishops, 
in  order  to  make  easier  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  ; 
to  multiply  disciples,  and  by  this  increase  their  own  influ- 
ence and  authority  ;  began  to  adopt  heathen  customs  and 
forms. 

When  the  canon  of  Scripture  was  closed,  and  the  last  of 
the  apostles  was  dead,  the  first  century  was  gone  ;  and  within 
twenty  years  of  that  time  the  perversion  of  the  truth  of 
Christ  had  become  widespread.  In  the  history  of  this 
century  and  of  this  subject  the  record  is,— 

"It  is  certain  that  to  religious  worship,  both  public  and  private, 
many  rites  were  added,  without  necessity,  and  to  the  offense  of  sober 
and  good  men."  —  Moshcim.1 

And  the  reason  of  this  is  stated  to  be  that  — 

"The  Christians  were  pronounced  atheists,  because  they  were  desti- 
tute of  temples,  altars,  victims,  priests,  and  all  that  pomp  in  which  the 
vulgar  suppose  the  essence  of  religion  to  consist.  For  unenlightened 
persons  are  prone  to  estimate  religion  by  what  meets  their  eyes.  To 
silence  this  accusation,  the  Christian  doctors  thought  it  necessary  to 
introduce  some  external  rites,  which  would  strike  the  senses  of  the 
people,  so  that  they  could  main  tain  themselves  really  to  possess  all 
those  things  of  which  Christians  were  charged  with  being  destitute. 
though  under  different  forms." —  Mosheim.z 


1  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,  part  li,  chap.  Iv,  par.  1,  Murdock's 
translation. 

2  Id.,  par.  3. 


208       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  QREAT  APOSTASY. 

This  was  at  once  to  accommodate  the  Christian  worship 
and  its  forms  to  that  of  the  heathen,  and  was  almost  at  one 
step  to  heathenize  Christianity.  No  heathen  element  or 
form  can  be  connected  with  Christianity  or  its  worship,  and 
Christianity  remain  pure. 

Of  all  the  ceremonies  of  the  heathen,  the  mysteries  were 
the  most  sacred  and  most  universally  practiced.  Some 
mysteries  were  in  honor  of  Bacchus,  some  of  Cybele,  but 
the  greatest  of  all,  those  considered  the  most  sacred  of  all 
and  the  most  widely  practiced,  were  the  Eleusinian,  so 
called  because  celebrated  at  Eleusis  in  Greece.  But  what- 
ever was  the  mystery  that  was  celebrated,  there  was  always 
in  it  as  an  essential  part  of  it,  the  elements  of  abomination 
that  characterized  sun  worship  everywhere,  because  the  mys- 
teries were  simply  forms  of  the  W7ide-spread  and  multiform 
worship  of  the  sun.  Among  the  first  of  the  perversions  of 
the  Christian  worship  was  to  give  to  its  forms  the  title  and 
air  of  the  mysteries.  For  says  the  record  :  — 

"  Among  the  Greeks  and  the  people  of  the  East,  nothing  was  held 
more  sacred  than  what  were  called  the  mysteries.  This  circumstance 
led  the  Christians,  in  order  to  impart  dignity  to  their  religion,  to  say 
that  they  also  had  similar  mysteries,  or  certain  holy  rites  concealed  from 
the  vulgar  ;  and  they  not  only  applied  the  terms  used  in  the  pagan  mys- 
teries to  Christian  institutions,  particularly  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
sapper,  but  they  gradually  introduced  also  the  rites  which  were  des- 
ignated by  those  terms."  —  Noalicim? 

That  this  point  may  be  more  fully  understood  we  shall 
give  a  sketch  of  the  Eleusinian  mysteries.  As  we  have 
stated,  although  there  were  others,  these  were  of  such  pre- 
eminence that  they  acquired  the  specific  name  by  way  of 
pre-eminence  —  the  mysteries.  The  festival  was  sacred  to 
Ceres  and  Proserpine.  Everything  about  it  contained  a 
mystery,  and  was  to  be  kept  secret  by  the  initiated.  "This 
mysterious  secrecy  was  solemnly  observed  and  enjoined  on  all 
the  votaries  of  the  goddess  ;  and  if  any  one  ever  appeared  at 

3  Id.,  par.  5, 


19 


THE  MYSTERIES.  209 

the  celebration,  either  intentionally  or  through  ignorance, 
without  proper  introduction,  he  was  immediately  punished 
with  death.  Persons  of  both  sexes  and  all  ages  were  ini- 
tiated at  this  solemnity,  and  it  was  looked  upon  as  so  heinous 
a  crime  to  neglect  this  sacred  part  of  religion,  that  it  was 
one  of  the  heaviest  accusations  which  contributed  to  the  con- 
demnation of  Socrates.  The  initiated  were  under  the  more 
particular  care  of  the  deities,  and  therefore  their  lives  were 
supposed  to  be  attended  with  more  happiness  and  real 
security  than  those  of  other  men.  This  benefit  was  not 
only  granted  during  life,  but  it  extended  beyond  the  grave, 
and  they  were  honored  with  the  first  places  in  the  Elysian 
fields,  while  others  were  left  to  wallow  in  perpetual  filth  and 
ignominy. "  —  Anthon.  * 

There  were  the  greater  and  the  lesser  mysteries.  The 
greater  were  the  Eleusinian  in  fact,  and  the  lesser  were 
invented,  according  to  the  mythological  story,  because  Her- 
cules passed  near  Eleusis,  where  the  greater  mysteries  were 
celebrated,  and  desired  to  be  initiated  ;  but  as  he  was  a 
stranger  and  therefore  could  not  lawfully  be  admitted,  a 
form  of  mysteries  was  adopted  into  which  he  could  be 
initiated.  These  were  ever  afterward  celebrated  as  the 
lesser,  and  were  observed  at  Agree.  In  the  course  of  time 
the  lesser  were  made  preparatory  to  the  greater,  and  the 
candidate  must  be  initiated  into  these  before  he  could  be 
initiated  into  the  greater.  "No  person  could  be  initiated 
at  Eleusis  without  a  previous  purification  at  Agree.  This 
purification  they  performed  by  keeping  themselves  pure, 
chaste,  and  unpolluted  during  nine  days,  after  which  they 
came  and  offered  sacrifices  and  prayers,  wearing  garlands 
of  flowers,  and  having  under  their  feet  Jupiter's  skin,  which 
was  the  skin  of  a  victim  offered  to  that  god.  The  person 
who  assisted  was  called  Iludranos,  from  kudor,  water, 
which  was  used  at  the  purification  ;  and  they  themselves 
were  called  the  initiated.  A  year  after  the  initiation  at  the 

*  "  Classical  Dictionary,"  Eleusinia, 


210       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

less  mysteries  they  sacrificed  a  sow  to  Ceres,  and  were 
admitted  into  the  greater,  and  the  secrets  of  the  festivals 
were  solemnly  revealed  to  them,  from  which  they  were 
called  inspectors. 

"The  initiation  was  performed  in  the  following  man- 
ner :  The  candidates,  crowned  with  myrtle,  were  admitted  by 
night  into  a  place  called  the  mystical  temple,  a  vast  and 
stupendous  building.  As  they  entered  the  temple,  they 
purified  themselves  by  washing  their  hands  in  holy  water, 
and  received  for  admonition  that  they  were  to  come  with  a 
mind  pure  and  undefiled,  without  which  the  cleanliness  of 
the  body  would  be  unacceptable.  After  this  the  holy  mys- 
teries were  read  to  them  from  a  large  book  called  petroma, 
because  made  of  two  stones,  petrai,  fitly  cemented  together  ; 
and  then*  the  priest  proposed  to  them  certain  questions,  to 
which  they  readily  answered.  After  this,  strange  and  fear- 
ful objects  presented  themselves  to  their  sight ;  the  place 
often  seemed  to  quake,  and  to  appear  suddenly  resplendent 
with  fire,  and  immediately  covered  with  gloomy  darkness 
and  horror." — Anthon.6  After  initiation,  the  celebration 
lasted  nine  days. 

These  mysteries,  as  well  as  those  of  Bacchus  and  others, 
were  directly  related  to  the  sun,  for  "the  most,  holy  and 
perfect  rite  in  the  Eleusinian  Mysteries  was  to  show  an  ear 
of  corn  mowed  down  in  silence,  aird  this  was  a  symbol  of 
the  Phrygian  Atys. "-—  "  Encyclopedia  Eritannica. " ' 

The  Phrygian  Atys,  as  we  have  before  shown,  was  sim- 
ply the  incarnation  of  the  sun,  and  the  mysteries  being  a 
form  of  sun  worship,  the  "sacred"  symbols  cannot  be  de- 
scribed with  decency.  Having  given  in  a  previous  chapter 
the  characteristics  of  the  celebration  of  the  worship  of  the 
sun,  it  is  not  necessary  to  describe  the  actions  that  were  per- 
formed in  the  celebration  of  tho  mysteries  after  the  initia- 
tion, any  further  than  is  spoken  by  the  apostle  with  direct 

5 Id.  «  Article  "  Mysteries." 


THE  FORMS   OF  SUN   WORSHIP  ADOPTED.        21 1 

reference  to  this  subject.  '"Have  no  fellowship  with  the 
unfruitful  works  of  darkness,  but  rather  reprove  them.  For 
it  is  a  shame  even  to  speak  of  those  things  which  are  done 
of  them  in  secret."  Eph.  v,  11,  12. 

It  was  to  accommodate  the  Christian  worship  to  the 
minds  of  a  people  who  practiced  these  things  that  the 
bishops  gave  to  the  Christian  ordinances  the  name  of  mys- 
teries. The  Lord's  supper  was  made  the  greater  mystery, 
baptism  the  lesser  and  the  initiatory  rite  to  the  celebration 
of  the  former.  After  the  heathen  manner  also  a  white  gar- 
ment was  used  as  the  initiatory  robe,  and  the  candidate 
having  been  baptized,  and  thus  initiated  into  the  lesser 
mysteries,  was  admitted  into  what  was  called  in  the  church 
the  order  of  catechumens,  in  which  order  they  remained  a 
certain  length  of  time,  as  in  the  heathen  celebration,  before 
they  were  admitted  to  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  supper, 
the  greater  mystery. 

"This  practice  originated  in  the  Eastern  provinces,  and 
then  after  the  time  of  Adrian  (who  first  introduced  the 
pagan  mysteries  among  the  Latins)  it  spread  among  the 
Christians  of  the  West."  The  reign  of  Hadrian  was  from 
117-138.  Therefore,  before  the  second  century  was  half 
gone,  before  the  last  of  the  apostles  had  been  dead  forty 
years,  this  apostasy,  this  working  of  the  mystery  of  iniquity, 
had  so  largely  spread  over  both  the  East  and  the  "West,  that 
it  is  literally  true  that  "  a  large  part,  therefore,  of  the  Chris- 
tian observances  and  institutions  even  in  this  century,  had 
the  aspect  of  the  pagan  mysteries." — MosJieim.1 

Nor  is  this  all.  In  the  previous  chapter  we  have  abund- 
antly shown  the  worship  of  the  sun  to  have  been  universal. 
These  apostates  not  being  content  with  so  much  of  the  sun 
worship  as  appeared  in  the  celebration  of  the  mysteries, 
adopted  the  heathen  custom  of  worshiping  toward  the  East. 
So  says  the  history  :  — 

7  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,  part  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  5. 


212       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

"Before  the  coming  of  Christ,  all  the  Eastern  nations  performed  di- 
vine worship  with  their  faces  turned  to  that  part  of  the  heavens  where 
the  sun  displays  his  rising  beams.  This  custom  was  founded  upon  a 
general  opinion  that  God,  whose  essence  they  looked  upon  to  be  light, 
and  whom  they  considered  as  being  circumscribed  within  certain  limits, 
dwelt  in  that  part  of  the  firmament  from  which  he  sends  forth  the  sun, 
the  bright  image  of  his  benignity  and  glory.  The  Christian  converts,  in- 
deed, rejected  this  gross  error  [of  supposing  that  God  dwelt  in  that  part 
of  the  firmament] ;  but  they  retained  the  ancient  and  universal  custom 
of  worshiping  toward  the  east,  which  sprang  from  it.  Nor  is  this  cus- 
tom abolished  even  in  our  times,  but  still  prevails  in  a  great  number  of 
Christian  churches. " —  Moslidm* 

The  next  step  in  addition  to  this  was  the  adoption  of 
the  day  of  the  sun  as  a  festival  day.  To  such  an  extent 
were  the  forms  of  sun  worship  practiced  in  this  apostasy, 
that  before  the  close  of  the  second  century  the  heathen 
themselves  charged  these  so-called  Christians  with  worship- 
ing the  sun.  A  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Carthage,  then 
and  now  one  of  the  "church  Fathers,"  who  wrote  about 
A.  D.  200,  considered  it  necessary  to  make  a  defense  of  the 
practice,  which  he  did  to  the  following  effect  in  an  address 
to  the  rulers  and  magistrates  of  the  Roman  empire  :  — 

"Others,  again,  certainly  with  more  information  and  greater  veri- 
similitude, believe  that  the  sun  is  our  god.  We  shall  be  counted  Persians 
perhaps,  though  we  do  not  worship  the  orb  of  day  painted  on  a  piece  of 
linen  cloth,  having  himself  everywhere  in  his  own  disc.  The  idea  no 
doubt  has  originated  from  our  being  known  to  turn  to  the  east  in  prayer. 
But  you,  many  of  you,  also  under  pretense  sometimes  of  worshiping 
the  heavenly  bodies,  move  your  lips  in  the  direction  of  the  sunrise.  In 
the  same  way,  if  we  devote  Sunday  to  rejoicing,  from  a  far  different 
reason  than  sun  worship,  we  have  some  resemblance  to  those  of  you  who 
devote  the  day  of  Saturn  to  ease  and  luxury,  though  they  too  go  far 
away  from  Jewish  ways,  of  which  indeed  they  are  ignorant."  —  Ter- 
tuttian.9 

And  again  in  an  address  to  all  the  heathen  he  justifies 
this  practice  by  the  argument,  in  effect,  You  do  the  same 

8Jd.,  par.  7,  Maclaine's  translation.  9"  Apology,"  chap.  xvl. 


ROME  EXALTS  SUNDAY.  213 

thing,  you  originated  it  too,  therefore  you  have  no  right  to 
blame  us.     In  his  own  words  his  defense  is  as  follows  :  — 

"Others,  with  greater  regard  to  good  manners,  it  must  be  confessed, 
suppose  that  the  sun  is  the  god  of  the  Christians,  because  it  is  a  well- 
known  fact  that  we  pray  towards  the  east,  or  because  we  make  Sunday 
a  day  of  festivity.  What  then  ?  Do  you  do  less  than  this  ?  Do  not 
many  among  you,  with  an  affectation  of  sometimes  worshiping  the  heav- 
enly bodies,  likewise  move  your  lips  in  the  direction  of  the  sunrise  ?  It 
is  you,  at  all  events,  who  have  admitted  the  sun  into  the  calendar  of  the 
week  ;  and  you  have  selected  its  day,  in  preference  to  the  preceding  day, 
as  the  most  suitable  in  the  week  for  either  an  entire  abstinence  from  the 
bath,  or  for  its  postponement  until  the  evening,  or  for  taking  rest  and 
banqueting." —  Tertullian.10 

This  accommodation  was  easily  made,  and  all  this  practice 
was  easily  justified,  by  the  perverse-minded  teachers,  in  the 
perversion  of  such  scriptures  as,  "  The  Lord  God  is  a  sun 
and  shield  "  (Ps.  Ixxxiv,  11)  ;  and,  "Unto  you  that  fear  my 
name  shall  the  Sun  of  righteousness  arise  with  healing  in 
his  wings."  Mai.  iv,  2. 

As  this  custom  spread  and  through  it  such  disciples  were 
multiplied,  the  ambition  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  grew  apace. 
It  was  in  honor  of  the  day  of  the  sun  that  there  was  mani- 
fested the  first  attempt  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  compel  the 
obedience  of  all  other  bishops,  and  the  fact  that  this  attempt 
was  made  in  such  a  cause,  at  the  very  time  when  these  pre- 
tended Christians  were  openly  accused  by  the  heathen  with 
worshiping  the  sun,  is  strongly  suggestive. 

From  Rome  there  came  now  another  addition  to  the  sun- 
worshiping  apostasy.  The  first  Christians  being  mostly 
Jews,  continued  to  celebrate  the  passover  in  remembrance 
of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  true  passover  ;  and  this  was  con- 
tinued among  those  who  from  among  the  Gentiles  had  turned 
to  Christ.  Accordingly  the  celebration  was  always  on  the 
passover  day  —  the  fourteenth  of  the  first  month.  Rome, 

10  "Ad  Nationes,"  book  i,  chap.  xiii. 


214       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

however,  and  from  her  all  the  West,  adopted  the  day  of  the 
sun  as  the  day  of  this  celebration.  According  to  the  Eastern 
custom,  the  celebration,  being  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
month,  would  of  course  fall  on  different  days  of  the  week 
as  the  years  revolved.  The  rule  of  Rome  was  that  the  cele- 
bration must  always  be  on  a  Sunday  —  the  Sunday  nearest 
to  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  first  month  of  the  Jewish  year. 
And  if  the  fourteenth  day  of  that  month  should  itself  be  a 
Sunday,  then  the  celebration  was  not  to  be  held  on  that  day, 
but  upon  the  next  Sunday.  One  reason  of  this  was  not  only 
to  be  as  like  the  heathen  as  possible,  but  to  be  as  unlike  the 
Jews  as  possible  :  this,  in  order  not  only  to  facilitate  the 
"conversion"  of  the  heathen  by  conforming  to  their  cus- 
toms, but  also  by  pandering  to  their  spirit  of  contempt  and 
hatred  of  the  Jews.  It  was  upon  this  point  that  the  bishop 
of  Rome  made  his  first  open  attempt  at  absolutism. 

We  know  not  precisely  when  this  began,  but  it  was  prac- 
ticed in  Rome  as  early  as  the  time  of  Sixtus  I,  who  was 
bishop  of  Rome  A.  D.  119-128.  The  practice  was  promoted 
by  his  successors,  and  Anicetus,  who  was  bishop  of  Rome 
A.  D.  157-168,  "would  neither  conform  to  that- [Eastern] 
custom  himself,  nor  suffer  any  under  his  jurisdiction  to  con- 
form to  it,  obliging  them  to  celebrate  that  solemnity  on  the 
Sunday  next  following  the  fourteenth  of  the  moon."  — 
Bower}*  In  A.  D.  100,  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  made 
a  journey  to  Rome  to  consult  with  Anicetus  about  this  ques- 
tion, though  nothing  special  came  of  the  consultation.  Victor, 
who  was  bishop  of  Rome  A.  D.  192-202,  likewise  proposed 
to  oblige  only  those  under  his  jurisdiction  to  conform  to  the 
practice  of  Rome  ;  but  he  asserted  jurisdiction  over  all,  and 
therefore  presumed  to  command  all. 

"Accordingly,  after  having  taken  the  advice  of  some 
foreign  bishops,  he  wrote  an  imperious  letter  to  the  Asiatic 
prelates  commanding  them  to  imitate  the  example  of  the 

11  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  under  "  Pius  "  and  "  Anicetus." 


HEATHEN  PHILOSOPHY  ADOPTED.  215 

Western  Christians  with  respect  to  the  time  of  celebrating 
the  festival  of  Easter.  The  Asiatics  answered  this  lordly 
requisition  by  the  pen  of  Polycrates,  bishop  of  Ephesus, 
who  declared  in  their  name,  with  great  spirit  and  resolution, 
that  they  would  by  no  means  depart,  in  this  manner,  from 
the  custom  handed  down  to  them  by  their  ancestors.  Upon 
this  the  thunder  of  excommunication  began  to  roar.  Victor, 
exasperated  by  this  resolute  answer  of  the  Asiatic  bishops, 
broke  communion  with  them,  pronounced  them  unworthy  of 
the  name  of  his  brethren,  and  excluded  them  from  all  fel- 
lowship with  the  church  of  Rome." — Mosheim.™ 

In  view  of  these  things  it  will  readily  be  seen  that  be- 
tween paganism  and  this  kind  of  Christianity  it  soon  became 
difficult  to  distinguish,  arid  the  third  century  only  went  to 
make  any  distinction  still  more  difficult  to  be  discerned. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century,  there  sprang  up 
in  Egypt  a  school  of  pagan  philosophy  called  the  "Eclec- 
tic." The  patrons  of  this  school  called  themselves  "Eclec- 
tics "  because  they  professed  to  be  in  search  of  truth  alone, 
and  to  be  ready  to  adopt  any  tenet  of  any  system  in  exist- 
ence which  seemed  to  them  to  be  agreeable  to  their  ideas 
of  truth.  They  held  Plato  to  be  the  one  person  above  all 
others  who  had  attained  the  nearest  to  truth  in  the  greatest 
number  of  points.  Hence  they  were  also  called  "Plato- 
nists." 

"This  philosophy  was  adopted  by  such  of  the  learned  at 
Alexandria,  as  wished  to  be  accounted  Christians,  and  yet 
to  retain  the  name,  the  garb,  and  the  rank  of  philosophers. 
In  particular,  all  those  who  in  this  century  presided  in  the 
schools  of  the  Christians  at  Alexandria,  Athenagoras,  Pan- 
trenus,  and  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  are  said  to  have  approved 
of  it.  These  men  were  persuaded  that  true  philosophy,  the 


M  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,   part  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  11,  Maclaine's 
translation. 


216       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

great  and  most  salutary  gift  of  God,  lay  in  scattered  frag- 
ments among  all  the  sects  of  philosophers ;  and  therefore, 
that  it  was  the  duty  of  every  wise  man,  and  especially  of  a 
Christian  teacher,  to  collect  those  fragments  from  all  quar- 
ters, and  to  use  them  for  the  defense  of  religion  and  the 
confutation  of  impiety.  Yet  this  selection  of  opinions  did 
not  prevent  them  from  regarding  Plato  as  wiser  than  all  the 
rest,  and  as  especially  remarkable  for  treating  the  Deity,  the 
soul,  and  things  remote  from  sense,  so  as  to  suit  the  Chris- 
tian scheme."  —  Mosheim.™ 

In  the  end  of  the  second  century,  and  especially  in  the 
first  forty-one  years  of  the  third,  there  flourished  in  Alex- 
andria one  of  these  would-be-philosophers  —  Ammonius 
Saccas  by  name  —  who  gave  a  turn  to  the  philosophy  of  the 
Eclectics,  which  caused  his  sect  to  be  called  the  New  Pla- 
tonists.  The  difference  between  the  Eclectic  and  the  system 
founded  by  Ammonius  was  this :  The  Eclectics  held,  as 
above  stated,  that  in  every  system  of  thought  in  the  world 
there  was  some  truth,  but  mixed  with  error,  their  task  being 
to  select  from  all  systems  that  portion  of  truth  which  was  in 
each,  and  from  all  these  to  form  one  harmonious  system. 
Ammonius  held  that  when  the  truth  was  known,  all  sects 
had  the  same  identical  system  of  truth  ;  that  the  differences 
among  them  were  caused  simply  by  the  different  ways  of 
stating  that  truth  ;  and  that  the  proper  task  of  the  philoso- 
pher was  to  find  such  a  means  of  stating  the  truth  that  all 
should  be  able  to  understand  it,  and  so  each  one  understand 
all  the  others.  This  was  to  be  accomplished  by  a  system  of 
allegorizing  and  mystification,  by  which  anybody  could  get 
whatever  he  wanted  out  of  any  writing  that  might  come  to 
his  notice. 

One  of  the  earliest  attache's  to  this  philosophy  from 
among  those  who  professed  to  be  Christians,  was  Clem- 
ent of  Alexandria,  who  became  the  head  of  that  kind 

13  Id.,  chap,  i,  par.  0,  Murdoch's  translation. 


CLEMENT'S  PHILOSOPHIC  MYSTICISM.  217 

of  school  at  Alexandria.  These  philosophers  "believed 
the  language  of  Scripture  to  contain  two  meanings  ;  the 
one  obvious,  and  corresponding  with  the  direct  import  of 
the  words  ;  the  other  recondite,  and  concealed  under  the 
words,  like  a  nut  by  the  shell.  The  former  they  neglected, 
as  of  little  value,  their  study  chiefly  being  to  extract  the 
latter  :  in  other  words,  they  were  more  intent  on  throwing 
obscurity  over  the  sacred  writings,  by  the  fictions  of  their 
own  imaginations,  than  on  searching  out  their  true  meanings. 
Some  also,  and  this  is  stated  especially  of  Clement,  accommo- 
dated the  divine  oracles  to  the  precepts  of  philosophy." 
Jtfosheim. " 

The  following  highly  edifying  explanation  by  Clement, 
of  the  Scripture  relating  to  the  fish  which  Peter  caught,  will 
illustrate  this  system  of  interpretation  :  — 

"That  flsli  then  which,  at  the  command  of  the  Lord,  Peter  caught, 
points  to  digestible  and  God-given  and  moderate  food.  And  by  those 
who  rise  from  the  water  to  the  bait  of  righteousness,  he  admonishes  us 
to  take  away  luxury  and  avarice,  as  the  coin  from  the  fish  ;  in  order  that 
he  might  displace  vainglory  ;  and  by  giving  the  stater  to  the  taxgatherers, 
and  'rendering  to  Caesar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's,'  might  preserve 
'to  God  the  things  which  are  God's.'  The  stater  is  capable  of  other 
explanations  not  unknown  to  us,  but  the  present  is  not  a  suitable  occa- 
sion for  their  treatment.  Let  the  mention  we  make  for  our  present  pur- 
pose suffice,  as  it  is  not  unsuitable  to  the  flowers  of  the  Word  ;  and  we 
have  often  done  this,  drawing  to  the  urgent  point  of  the  question  the  most 
beneficial  fountain,  in  order  to  water  those  who  have  been  planted  by 
the  Word."15 

And  this,  of  the  Saviour's  miracle  of  turning  the  water 
into  wine,  also  helps  to  an  understanding  of  the  excellent 
wisdom  of  this  philosophy  :  — 

"  He  gave  life  to  the  watery  element  of  the  meaning  of  the  law,  fill- 
ing with  his  blood  the  doer  of  it  who  is  of  Adam,  that  is,  the  whole 
world  ;  supplying  piety  with  drink  from  the  vine  of  truth,  the  mixture 
of  the  old  law  and  of  the  new  word,  in  order  to  the  fulfillment  of  the 
predestined  time." 1(> 
14  7d.,  chap,  iii,  par.  5.  16"The  Instructor,"  book  ii,  chap.  I.  16Id.  chap.  i. 


218       THE  FALLING  AWAY— THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

Of  the  benefits  children  will  derive  from  a  starvation 
diet,  he  gives  this  valuable  instruction  :  - 

"  They  say  that  the  bodies  of  children,  when  shooting  up  to  their 
height,  are  made  to  grow  right  by  deficiency  in  nourishment.  For  then 
the  spirit,  which  pervades  the  body  in  order  to  its  growth,  is  not  checked 
by  abundance  of  food  obstructing  the  freedom  of  its  course."17 

The  close  resemblance  between  the  pagan  philosophy 
and  that  of  the  New  Platonists  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that 
but  one  of  the  classes  concerned  could  tell  to  which  of  them 
Ammonius  Saccas  belonged.  The  pagans  generally  re- 
garded him  a  pagan.  His  own  kind  of  Christians  counted 
him  a  good  Christian  all  his  life.  The  genuine  Christians 
all  knew  that  he  was  a  pagan,  and  that  the  truth  of  the 
whole  matter  was  that  he  was  a  pretended  Christian  "who 
adopted  with  such  dexterity  the  doctrines  of  the  pagan  phi- 
losophy, as  to  appear  a  Christian  to  the  Christians,  and  a 
pagan  to  the  pagans."  He  died  A.  D.  211. 

Clement  is  supposed  to  have  died  about  A.  n.  220,  and 
the  fame  and  influence  which  he  had  acquired — and  it  was 
considerable  —  was  far  outshone  by  Origen,  who  had  been 
taught  by  both  Clement  and  Ammonius.  Origen  imbibed 
all  the  allegorical  and  mystifying  processes  of  both  Ammo- 
nius and  Clement,  and  multiplied  upon  them  from  his  own 
wild  imagination.  He  was  not  content  with  finding  two 
meanings  in  the  Scriptures  as  those  before  him,  but  took  the 
secondary  sense,  the  hidden  meaning,  and  added  to  it  four 
additional  meanings  of  his  own.  His  system  then  stood 
thus  :  First,  All  scripture  contains  two  meanings,  the  lit- 
eral and  the  hidden.  Second,  This  hidden  sense  has  within 
itself  two  meanings,  the  moral  and  the  mystical.  Ttiird, 
The  mystical  has  within  it  yet  two  other  meanings,  the  alle- 
gorical and  the  anagogical.  According  to  this  method  of 


17  Id.,  chap.  i. 

18  Note  to  Mosheim's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,   part  ii,  chap,  i, 
par.  7,  Madame's  translation. 


ORIOEN'S  PHILOSOPHIC  MYSTICISM.  219 

mysticism,  therefore,  in  every  passage  of  Scripture  there 
are  at  least  three  meanings,  and  there  may  be  any  number 
from  three  to  six. 

His  explanation  of  it  is  this  :  First,  Man  is  composed  of 
three  parts,  a  rational  mind,  a  sensitive  soul,  and  a  visible 
body.  The  Scriptures  resemble  man,  and  therefore  have  a 
three-fold  sense  ;  («)  a  literal  sense  which  corresponds  to  the 
body  ;  (ty  a  moral  sense  corresponding  to  the  soul  ;  and  (c) 
a  mystical  sense  which  corresponds  to  the  mind.  Second, 
As  the  body  is  the  baser  part  of  man,  so  the  literal  is  the 
baser  sense  of  Scripture  ;  and  as  the  body  often  betrays 
good  men  into  sin,  so  the  literal  sense  of  Scripture  often 
leads  into  error.  Therefore,  those  who  would  see  more  in 
the  Scripture  than  common  people  could  see,  must  search 
out  this  hidden  meaning,  and  yet  further  must  search  in  that 
hidden  meaning  for  the  moral  sense.  And  those  who  would 
be  perfect  must  carry  their  search  yet  farther,  and  beyond 
this  moral  sense  which  they  found  in  the  hidden  meaning 
they  must  find  the  mystical  sense,  with  its  additional  train  of 
allegorical  and  anagogical  senses. 

As  in  this  system  of  philosophy  the  body  of  man  was  a 
clog  to  the  soul  and  hindered  it  in  its  heavenly  aspirations, 
and  was  therefore  to  be  despised,  and  by  punishment  and 
starvation  was  to  be  separated  as  far  as  possible  from  the 
soul,  it  followed  that  the  literal  sense  of  Scripture,  which 
corresponded  to  man's  body  likewise,  was  a  hinderance  to 
the  proper  understanding  of  all  the  hidden  meanings  of  the 
Scripture,  and  was  to  be  despised  and  separated  as  far  as 
possible  from  the  hidden  sense,  and  counted  of  the  least 
possible  worth.  Accordingly,  one  of  the  first  principles  of 
this  teaching  was  the  following  :  — 

"The  source  of  many  evils  lies  in  adhering  to  the  carnal  or  external 
part  of  Scripture.  Those  who  do  so  will  not  attain  to  the  kingdom  of 
God.  Let  us  therefore  seek  after  the  spirit  and  substantial  fruit  of  the 
word,  which  are  hidden  and  mysterious."  —  Origeti.™ 

19  Quoted  in  Maclainc's  Moshcim,  Century  iii,  part  il,  chap,  iii,  par.  5,  iiote. 


220       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

And  the  next  step  was  but  the  logical  result  of  this ; 
namely :  — 

"  The  Scriptures  are  of  little  use  to  those  who  understand  them  as 
they  are  written." —  Origen.20 

By  such  a  system  as  this  it  is  evident  that  any  one  could 
find  whatever  he  pleased  in  any  passage  of  Scripture,  and 
that  the  Scripture  could  be  made  to  support  any  doctrine 
that  was  ever  invented  by  the  wildest  fancy  of  the  veriest 
fanatic.  Even  though  the  doctrine  might  be  flatly  contra- 
dictory to  the  Scripture,  the  Scripture  could  be  made  fully 
to  agree  with  and  teach  the  doctrine. 

From  this  sketch  of  Platonism  as  held  by  Origen,  the 
essential  truth  of  the  following  passag'e  will  be  readily 
seen  :  — 

"This  new  species  of  philosophy,  imprudently  adopted  by  Origen 
and  other  Christians,  did  immense  harm  to  Christianity.  For  it  led  the 
teachers  of  it  to  involve  in  philosophic  obscurity  many  parts  of  our 
religion,  which  were  in  themselves  plain  and  easy  to  be  understood  ;  and 
to  add  to  the  precepts  of  the  Saviour  no  few  things,  of  which  not  a  word 
can  be  found  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  ...  It  recommended  to  Christians 
various  foolish  and  useless  rites,  suited  only  to  nourish  superstition,  no 
small  part  of  which  we  see  religiously  observed  by  many  even  to  the 
present  day.  And  finally  it  alienated  the  minds  of  many,  in  the  follow- 
ing centuries,  from  Christianity  itself,  and  produced  a  heterogeneous 
species  of  religion,  consisting"  of  Christian  and  Platonic  principles  com- 
bined."  — Mosheim.zl 

On  the  part  of  real  Christians,  those  who  loved  the 
truth  as  it  is  in  Christ,  there  was  strong  opposition  from  the 


20  Id.     With  such  a  system  as  this  for  a  basis,  it  is  logical  enough  that  the 
Catholic  Church  should  forbid  the  common  people  to  read  the  Scriptures.     For 
Origen  is  one  of  the  chiefest  fathers  of  the  Catholic  Church;    and  "from  the 
days  of   Origen  to  those  of    Chrysostom,  there  was  not  a  single  eminent  com- 
mentator who  did  not  borrow  largely  from  the  works  of"  Origen.     "He  was 
the  chief  teacher  of  even  the  most  orthodox  of  the  Western  Fathers."  —  Far- 
Tar's  "History  of  Interpretation,"  last  paragraph  under  "Origen." 

21  Id.,  Century  ii,  part  ii,  chap,  i,  par.  12,  Murdock's  translation. 


IMPERIAL  AIMS  AT  RELIGIOUS    UNITY.  221 

first  to  this  whole  system  of  philosophy  with  its  mystification 
and  allegory.  uBut  the  friends  of  philosophy  and  litera- 
ture gradually  acquired  the  ascendency.  To  this  issue  Ori- 
gen  contributed  very  much  ;  who,  having  early  imbibed  the 
principles  of  the  New  Platonism,  inauspiciously  applied 
them  to  theology,  and  earnestly  recommended  them  to  the 
numerous  youth  who  attended  on  his  instructions.  And  the 
greater  the  influence  of  this  man,  which  quickly  spread 
over  the  whole  Christian  world,  the  more  readily  was  his 
method  of  explaining  the  sacred  doctrines  propagated."  — 
Mosheim.™ 

While  this  effort  was  being  made  on  the  side  of  phil- 
osophy to  unite  all  religions,  there  was  at  the  same  time  a 
like  effort  on  the  side  of  politics.  This  was  the  aim  of 
Elagabalus,  A.  D.  218  to  222.  We  have  already  shown  that 
it  was  the  ambition  of  •  Elagabalus  to  make  the  worship  of 
the  sun  supersede  all  other  worship  in  Rome.  It  is  further 
related  of  him  that  a  more  ambitious  scheme  even  than  this 
was  in  the  emperor's  mind,  which  was  nothing  less  than  the 
blending  of  all  religions  into  one,  of  which  "the  sun  was  to 
be  the  central  object  of  adoration."  —  Mil-man.™  But  the 
elements  were  not  yet  fully  prepared  for  such  a  fusion. 
Also  the  shortness  of  the  reign  of  Elagabalus  prevented 
any  decided  advancement  toward  success. 

Alexander  Severus — A.  D.  222  to  225  — held  to  the  same 
idea,  and  carried  it  into  effect  so  far  as  his  individual  prac- 
tice was  concerned.  "  The  mother  of  Alexander  Severus,  the 
able,  perhaps  crafty  and  rapacious,  Mammsea,  had  at  least 
held  intercourse  with  the  Christians  of  Syria.  She  had 
conversed  with  the  celebrated  Or!gen,  and  listened  to  his 
exhortations,  if  without  conversion,  still  not  without  respect. 
Alexander,  though  he  had  neither  the  religious  education, 
the  pontifical  character,  nor  the  dissolute  manners  of  his 

22  JcZ.,  Century  iii,  part  ii,  chap,  i,  par.  5. 

23  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap  viii,  par.  22. 


222       THE  FALLING  AWAY— THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

predecessor,  was  a  Syrian,  with  no  hereditary  attachment  to 
the  Roman  form  of  paganism.  He  seems  to  have  affected  a 
kind  of  universalism  :  he  paid  decent  respect  to  the  gods  of 
the  capitol  ;  he  held  in  honor  the  Egyptian  worship,  and  en- 
larged the  temples  of  Isis  and  Serapis.  In  his  own  palace, 
with  respectful  indifference,  he  enshrined,  as  it  were,  as  his 
household  deities,  the  representatives  of  the  different  relig- 
ions or  theo-philosophic  systems  which  were  prevalent  in  the 
Roman  empire,  —  Orpheus,  Abraham,  Christ,  arid  Apollo- 
nius  of  Tyana.  .  .  .  Tlie  homage  of  Alexander  Severus 
may  Ije  a  fair  test  of  the  general  sentiment  of  tlie  more 
intelligent  heathen  of  his  time."  —  Milman,u  His  reign' 
was  also  too  short  to  accomplish  anything  beyond  his  own 
individual  example.  But  the  same  tendency  went  rapidly 
forward. 

On  the  side  of  philosophy  and  the  apostasy,  the  progress 
was  continuous  and  rapid.  About  the  midd]e  of  this  cent- 
ury, Origen  and  Celsus,  a  pagan  philosopher,  held  a  pro- 
tracted discussion  upon  the  respective  merits  of  the  pagan 
and  the  Christian  philosophy.  And  the  standing  of  the  two 
systems  at  this  time,  is  well  described  in  the  following  state- 
ment :  — 

"Heathenism,  as  interpreted  by  philosophy,  almost  found  favor  with 
some  of  the  more  moderate  Christian  apologists.  .  .  .  The  Christians 
endeavored  to  enlist  the  earlier  philosophers  in  their  cause  ;  they  were 
scarcely  content  with  asserting  that  the  nobler  Grecian  philosophy  might 
be  designed  to  prepare  the  human  mind  for  the  reception  of  Christianity  ; 
they  were  almost  inclined  to  endow  these  sages  with  a  kind  of  prophetic 
foreknowledge  of  its  more  mysterious  doctrines.  'I  have  explained,' 
says  the  Christian  in  Minucius  Felft,  '  the  opinions  of  almost  all  the  phi- 
losophers, whose  most  illustrious  glory  it  is  that  they  have  worshiped  one 
God,  though  under  various  names  ;  so  that  one  might  suppose  either 
that  the  Christians  of  the  present  day  are  philosophers,  or  that  the  phi- 
losophers of  old  were  already  Christians.' 

"These  advances  on  the  part  of  Christianity  were  more  than  met  by 
paganism.  The  heathen  religion,  which  prevailed  at  least  among  the 
21  Id.,  book  ii,  chap,  viii,  par.  24. 


PAGANISM  AND    THE  APOSTASY  ALIKE.  223 

more  enlightened  pagans  during  this  period,  .  .  .  was  almost  as  different 
from  that  of  the  older  Greeks  and  Romans,  or  even  that  which  prevailed 
at  the  commencement  of  the  empire,  as  it  was  from  Christianity.  .  .  . 
On  the  great  elementary  principle  of  Christianity,  the  unity  of  the 
supreme  God,  this  approximation  had  long  been  silently  made.  Celsus, 
in  his  celebrated  controversy  with  Origen,  asserts  that  this  philosoph- 
ical notion  of  the  Deity  is  perfectly  reconcilable  with  paganism."  — 


The  emperor  Decius,  having  no  sympathy  with  any  re- 
ligion, philosophy,  or  morality,  but  that  of  the  old  original 
Roman,  did  his  best  to  restore  it  throughout  the  empire. 
Hence  the  persecution,  as  described  in  Chapter  IY  of  this 
book.  Valerian  followed  closely  the  course  marked  out  by 
Decius  ;  but  in  the  forty  years  of  peace  to  religion,  from  the 
edict  of  toleration  by  Gallienus  to  the  edict  of  persecution 
by  Diocletian,  all  these  elements  worked  steadily  forward 
in  the  same  general  direction.  Of  the  progress  of  the 
apostasy  during  this  time,  we  have  a  powerful  illustration 
in  the  practice  of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  the  "wonder- 
worker. " 

Gregory  was  a  pupil  and  a  convert  of  Origen's.  Origen 
strongly  urged  him  "to  devote  his  acquirements  in  heathen 
science  and  learning,  to  the  elucidation  of  the  Scriptures." 
When  he  left  Origen's  school  at  Alexandria,  he  returned  to 
Pontus,  and  became  bishop  of  Neo  Caesarea,  A.  D.  240  to 
270,  and  how  fully  he  followed  the  advice  of  Origen  is 
shown  by  the  following  :  — 

"  '  When  Gregory  perceived  that  the  ignorant  multitude  persisted  in 
their  idolatry,  on  account  of  the  pleasures  and  sensual  gratifications 
which  they  enjoyed  at  the  pagan  festivals,  he  granted  them  a  permis- 
sion to  indulge  themselves  in  the  like  pleasures,  in  celebrating  the 
memory  of  the  holy  martyrs,  hoping  that,  in  process  of  time,  they 
would  return  of  their  own  accord,  to  a  more  virtuous  and  regular 
course  of  life.'  There  is  no  sort  of  doubt  that,  by  this  permission, 
Gregory  allowed  the  Christians  to  dance,  sport,  and  feast  at  the  tombs 
of  the  martyrs,  upon  their  respective  festivals,  and  to  do  everything 

>»  /<*.,  par.  38. 
20 


224       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  ORE  AT  APOSTASY. 

which  the  pagans  were  accustomed  to  in  their  temples,  during  the  feasts 
celebrated  in  honor  of  their  gods."  —  Moslieim.™ 

Neo  Csesarea  was  one  of  the  most  important  cities  in 
Pontus.  Yet  so  diligently  did  Gregory  thus  employ  the  tal- 
ents committed  to  him  by  Origen,  that  it  is  related  of  him 
that  whereas  ' '  there  were  said  to  be  only  seventeen  Chris- 
tians in  the  whole  city  when  he  first  entered  it  as  bishop, 
there  were  said  to  be  only  seventeen  pagans  in  it  at  the  time 
of  his  death."27  It  is  manifest,  however,  from  Gregory's 
practice,  that  those  who  were  by  him  brought  to  the  Chris- 
tian name  were  as  much  pagan  as  before  except  in  the  mere 
matter  of  the  name. 

In  the  time  of  Diocletian,  that  which  was  known  as 
paganism  was  so  far  different  from  the  original  paganism  of 
Rome  that  Milman  plainly  designates  it  as  the  "new  pa- 
ganism." This  new  paganism  was  so  little  removed  from 
the  apostate  form  of  Christianity  which  we  have  traced,  as 
really  to  differ  from  it  only  in  name.  The  standing  of 
the  two  systems  at  the  accession  of  Diocletian  is  thus 
described  :  — 

"Among  the  cares  of  his  administration,  he  by  no  means  neglected 
the  purification  of  the  ancient  religions.  In  paganism  itself,  that  silent 
but  manifest  change  of  which  we  have  already  noticed  the  commence- 
ment, had  been  creeping  on.  .  .  .  This  new  paganism,  as  has  been 
observed,  arose  out  of  the  alliance  of  the  philosophy  and  the  religion 
of  the  old  world.  These  once  implacable  adversaries  had  reconciled 
their  differences,  and  coalesced  against  the  common  enemy.  Chris- 
tianity itself  had  no  slight  influence  upon  the  formation  of  the  new 
system  ;  and  now  an  Eastern  element,  more  and  more  strongly  dominant, 
mingled  with  the  whole,  and  lent  it,  as  it  were,  a  visible  object  of  wor- 
ship. From  Christianity,  the  new  paganism  had  adopted  the  unity  of 
the  Deity,  and  scrupled  not  to  degrade  all  the  gods  of  the  older  world 
into  subordinate  demons  or  ministers.  The  Christians  had  incautiously 


26  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,  part  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  2,  note.     Mac- 
laine's  translation. 

87 "  Ante-Nicene  Library,"  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  introduction,  par.  1, 


THE   TWO  STREAMS   UNITE  IN  CONSTANTINE.        225 

held  the  same  language  :  both  concurred  in  the  name  of  demons  ;  but 
the  pagans  used  the  term  in  the  Platonic  sense,  as  good  but  subordinate 
spirits,  while  the  same  term  spoke  to  the  Christian  ear  as  expressive  of 
malignant  and  diabolic  agency.  But  the  Jupiter  Optimus  Maximus  was 
not  the  great  Supreme  of  the  new  system.  The  universal  deity  of  the 
East,  the  sun,  to  the  philosophic  teas  the  emblem  or  representative  ;  to 
the  vulgar,  the  Deity.  Diocletian  himself,  though  he  paid  so  much  def- 
erence to  the  older  faith  as  to  assume  the  title  of  Jovius,  as  belonging  to 
the  lord  of  the  world,  yet,  on  his  accession,  when  he  would  exculpate 
himself  from  all  concern  in  the  murder  of  his  predecessor,  Numerian, 
appealed  in  the  face  of  the  army  to  the  all-seeing  deity  of  the  sun.  It  is 
the  oracle  of  Apollo  of  Miletus,  consulted  by  the  hesitating  emperor, 
which  is  to  decide  the  fate  of  Christianity.  The  metaphorical  language  of 
Christianity  had  unconsciously  lent  strength  to  this  new  adversary  ;  and,  in 
adoring  the  visible  orb,  some,  no  doubt,  supposed  that  they  were  not  de- 
parting far  from  the  worship  of  the  '  Sun  of  Righteousness.' "  — Milman.zs 

Diocletian  himself  really  contemplated  the  same  fusion 
of  all  religions  into  one,  with  the  sun  as  the  one  great 
universal  deity,  which  Elagabalus  had  contemplated  in  his 
day  ;  but  by  Galerius  and  the  leading  philosopher  of  the 
new  paganism,  he  was  persuaded  to  use  all  the  power  of 
the  State  in  the  effort  to  make  paganism  alone  supreme  over 
and  against  every  form  and  every  profession  of  the  Christian 
name.  The  result,  however,  was  as  already  related,  that 
Galerius  was  compelled  to  issue  a  public  edict  confessing 
his  failure. 

Then  came  Constantine,  the  best  imperial  representative 
of  the  new  paganism,  and  the  most  devout  worshiper  of  the 
sun  as  the  supreme  and  universal  deity,  with  the  avowed 
purpose,  as  expressed  in  his  own  words,  "  First  to  bring  the 
diverse  judgments  formed  by  all  nations  respecting  the 
Deity  to  a  condition,  as  it  were,  of  settled  uniformity."  In 
Constantine  the  new  paganism  met  its  ideal  and  the  New 
Platonism  —  the  apostate,  paganized,  sun-worshiping  form 
of  Christianity  —  met  its  long-wished-for  instrument.  In 
him  the  two  streams  met.  In  him  the  aspiration  of  Elaga- 

28  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  ix,  par.  7. 


226       THE  FALLING  AWAY—  THE  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

balus,  the  hope  of  Ammonius  Saccas  and  Origen,  and  the 
ambition  of  the  perverse-minded,  self-exalted  bishops,  were 
all  realized  and  accomplished  —  a  new,  imperial,  and  uni- 
versal religion  was  created.  Therefore,  "The  reign  of 
Constantine  the  Great  forms  one  of  the  epochs  in  the 
history  of  the  world.  It  is  the  era  of  the  dissolution  of 
the  Roman  empire  ;  the  commencement,  or  rather  consoli- 
dation, of  a  kind  of  Eastern  despotism,  with  a  new  capital, 
a  new  patriciate,  a  new  constitution,  a  new  financial  system, 
a  new,  though  as  yet  imperfect,  jurisprudence,  and,  finally,  a 
new  religion."  —  Milman.™ 

The  epoch  thus  formed  was  the  epoch  of  the  papacy  ; 
and  the  new  religion  thus  created  was  the  PAPAL  RELIGION. 

29  Id.,  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  1. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


THE   EXALTATION    OF   THE   BISHOPRIC. 

'TVHE  Scripture  was  fulfilled  ;  there  had  come  a  falling 
L  away.  But  that  there  should  come  a  falling  away,  was 
not  all  of  the  story  —  through  that  falling  away  there  was  to 
be  revealed  "that  man  of  sin,"  "  the  son  of  perdition,"  "the 
mystery  of  iniquity,"  "that  wicked,"  who  would  oppose  and 
exalt  himself  above  all  that  is  called  God  or  that  is  wor- 
shiped ;  and  who,  when  he  did  appear,  would  continue  even 
till  that  great  and  notable  event  —  the  second  coming  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

Referring  again  to  the  scripture  quoted  from  2  Thessalo- 
nians  ii,  2,  at  the  beginning  of  the  previous  chapter,  it  is 
seen  that  self-exaltation  is  the  spring  of  the  development  of 
this  power. 

As  that  scripture  expresses  it,  ' '  He  opposeth  and  exalteth 
himself."  As  another  scripture  gives  it,  "He  shall  magnify 
himself  in  his  heart."  And  another,  "  He  magnified  himself 
even  to  the  prince  of  the  host "  —  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
And  yet  another,  "He  shall  also  stand  up  against  the 
Prince  of  princes."  That  is,  he  shall  reign,  or  assert 
authority  above,  and  in  opposition  to,  the  authority  of 
Christ ;  or,  as  the  thought  is  developed  by  Paul,  this  power 
would  oppose  and  exalt  itself  above  all  that  is  called  God  or 
that  is  worshiped,  so  that  he  as  God  sitteth  in  the  temple  — 
the  place  of  worship  —  of  God,  showing  himself  that  he 
is  God. 

Referring  also  again  to  the  instruction  of  Paul  to  the 
elders  who  met  him  at  Miletus,  there  is  seen  a  prophecy  of 

[227] 


228  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

this  same  spirit  of  self-exaltation, — a  wish  to  gain  disciples 
to  themselves  instead  of  to  Christ.  They  would  prefer 
themselves  to  Christ,  thus  at  once  putting  themselves  above 
him,  in  opposition  to  him.  And  this  would  be  developed 
from  among  the  bishops.  "  Of  your  own  selves  shall  men 
arise,  speaking  perverse  things,  to  draw  away  disciples  after 
them. " 

This  spirit  was  actively  manifested  in  opposition  to  the 
apostle  John  while  he  was  yet  alive,  for  he  says  :  "I  wrote 
unto  the  church  ;  but  Diotrephes,  who  loveth  to  have  the 
pre-eminence  among  them,  receiveth  us  not. "  3  John  9. 

This  assertion  of  pre-eminence  was  shown  in  prating 
against  the  apostle  with  malicious  words,  and  not  only  re- 
jecting him,  but  casting  out  of  the  church  those  members 
who  would  receive  him.  It  was  but  a  little  while  after  the 
living  authority  of  the  apostles  was  gone,  before  this  was 
carried  to  yet  further  extremes. 

According  to  the  word  of  Christ,  there  is  no  such  thing  as 
pre-eminence,  or  mastership,  or  sovereignty  of  position,  among 
men  in  the  church.  There  was  once  an  argument  among  his 
disciples  as  to  who  should  be  counted  the  greatest,  and  Jesus 
called  them  unto  him  and  said  :  "Ye  know  that  they  which 
are  accounted  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  exercise  lordship  over 
them  ;  and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  upon  them. 
But  so  shall  it  not  be  among  you :  but  whosoever  will  be 
great  among  you,  shall  be  your  minister  :  and  whosoever 
among  you  will  be  the  chiefest,  shall  be  servant  of  all.  For 
even  the  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to 
minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many."  Mark  x, 
42-45. 

And  in  warning  his  disciples  of  all  times  against  the  prac- 
tice of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  of  that  time,  who  were  but 
the  popes  of  their  day,  he  says  they  "love  the  uppermost 
rooms  at  feasts,  and  the  chief  seats  in  the  synagogues,  and 
greetings  in  the  markets,  and  to  be  called  of  men,  Rabbi, 
Rabbi.  But  be  not  ye  called  Rabbi :  for  one  is  your  master, 


"ALL   Ytf  ARE  BRETHREN."  229 

even  Christ  ;  and  all  ye  are  brethren.  .  .  .  Neither  be  ye 
called  masters  :  for  one  is  your  master,  even  Christ.  But  he 
that  is  greatest  among  you  shall  be  your  servant.  And  who- 
soever shall  exalt  himself  shall  be  abased  ;  and  he  that  shall 
humble  himself  shall  be  exalted."  Matt,  xxiii,  6-12. 

With  these  instructions  the  apostles  went  forth  under  the 
great  commission  of  Christ,  preaching  everywhere  that  with 
the  Lord  there  is  no  respect  of  persons,  but  that  all  are  equal 
before  God.  There  is  neither  lordship  nor  over-lordship 
among  men  in  the  church  of  Christ  ;  but  all  are  brethren. 
Christ  only  is  the  head  of  the  church,  and  the  head  of 
every  man  in  the  church. 

In  the  church  each  member  has  the  same  rights  as  any 
other  member  ;  but  for  the  good  of  all  and  the  mutual  bene- 
fit of  all  concerned,  as  well  as  better  to  carry  on  his  work  in 
the  world,  the  Lord  has  established  his  church,  and  with  it  a 
system  of  church  order  in  which  certain  ones  are  chosen  to 
exercise  certain  functions  for  the  mutual  benefit  of  all  in  the 
organization.  These  officers  are  chosen  from  among  the 
membership  by  the  voice  of  the  membership.  Of  these  of- 
ficers there  are  two  classes,  and  two  only, —  bishops  and 
deacons.  This  is  shown  by  Paul's  letter  to  the  Philippians 
—  "Paul  and  Timotheus,  the  servants  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  all 
the  saints  in  Christ  Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi,  with  the 
bishops  and  deacons."  Chap,  i,  1. 

Bishops  are  sometimes  called  elders  ;  but  the  same  office 
is  always  signified.  When  Paul  gave  directions  to  Titus  in 
this  matter,  he  said  :  "For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete, 
that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting, 
and  ordain  elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thec  :  if 
any  be  blameless.  .  .  .  For  a  bishop  must  be  blameless,  as 
the  steward  of  God."  Titus  i,  5-7. 

This  is  further  shown  in  Acts  xx,  to  which  we  have 
before  referred  ;  when  Paul  had  called  unto  him  to  Miletus 
"the  elders  of  the  church"  of  Ephesus,  among  other  things 
he  said  to  them  :  ' '  Take  heed  therefore  unto  yourselves,  and 


230  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

to  all  the  flock,  over  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made 
you  overseers, "  —  episkopoi  —  bishops. 

Peter  also  writes  to  the  same  effect :  ' '  The  elders  which 
are  among  you  I  exhort,  who  am  also  an  elder,  and  a  witness 
of  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  also  a  partaker  of  the  glory 
that  'shall  be  revealed  :  Feed  the  flock  of  God  which  is  among 
you,  taking  the  oversight  thereof,  not  by  constraint,  but  will- 
ingly ;  not  for  filthy  lucre,  but  of  a  ready  mind ;  neither  as 
being  lords  over  God's  heritage,  but  being  ensamples  to 
the  flock."  1  Peter  v,  1-3. 

This  text  not  only  shows  that  the  terms  ' '  elder  "  and 
"bishop"  refer  to  the  same  identical  office,  but  it  shows  that 
Peter  counted  himself  as  one  among  them ;  and  that  not 
only  by  his  precept  but  by  his  example  he  showed  that  in 
this  office,  although  overseers  they  were  not  overrulers  or 
lords. 

The  true  idea  on  this  point  has  been  clearly  stated  as 
follows  :  — 

"It  has  been  said  that  the  pope,  the  bishops,  the  priests,  and  all 
those  who  people  convents,  form  the  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical  estate  ; 
and  that  princes,  nobles,  citizens,  and  peasants  form  the  secular  or  lay 
estate.  This  is  a  specious  tale  But  let  no  man  be  alarmed.  All  Chris- 
tians belong  to  the  spiritual  estate  ;  and  the  only  difference  between  them 
is  in  the  functions  which  they  fulfill.  We  have  all  but  one  baptism,  but 
one  faith  ;  and  these  constitute  the  spiritual  man.  Unction,  tonsure, 
ordination,  consecration,  given  by  the  pope,  or  by  a  bishop,  may  make  a 
hypocrite,  but  can  never  make  a  spiritual  man.  We  are  all  consecrated 
priests  by  baptism,  as  St.  Peter  says:  'You  are  a  royal  priesthood;' 
although  all  do  not  actually  perform  the  offices  of  kings  and  priests, 
because  no  one  can  assume  what  is  common  to  all  without  the  common 
consent.  But  if  this  consecration  of  God  did  not  belong  to  us,  the 
unction  of  the  pope  could  not  make  a  single  priest.  If  ten  brothers, 
the  sons  of  one  king,  and  possessing  equal  claims  to  his  inheritance, 
should  choose  one  of  their  number  to  administer  for  them,  they  would 
all  be  kings,  and  yet  only  one  of  them  would  be  the  administrator  of 
their  common  power.  So  it  is  in  the  church.  Were  several  pious  lay- 
men banished  to  a  desert,  and  were  they,  from  not  having  among  them 
a  priest  consecrated  by  a  bishop,  to  agree  in  selecting  one  of  their 


A  CLERICAL  ARISTOCRACY  CREATED.         231 

number,  whether  married  or  not,  he  would  be  as  truly  a  priest  as  if  all 
the  bishops  of  the  world  had  consecrated  him." —  Luther.1 

Such  is  the  order  in  the  church  of  Christ,  and  as  every 
Christian  is  God's  freeman  and  Christ's  servant,  it  follows  as 
has  been  well  stated,  that  "  monarchy  in  spiritual  things  does 
not  harmonize  with  the  spirit  of  Christianity." — Neander* 
Yet  this  order  was  not  suffered  long  to  remain.  A  distinc- 
tion'was  very  soon  asserted  between  the  bishop  and  the  elder, 
and  the  bishop  assumed  a  precedence  and  an  authority  over 
the  elder,  who  was  now  distinguished  from  the  bishop  by 
the  title  of  "presbyter"  only.  This  was  easily  and  very 
naturally  accomplished. 

For  instance,  a  church  would  be  established  in  a  certain 
city.  Soon  perhaps  another  church  or  churches  would  be 
established  in  that  same  city,  or  near  to  it  in  the  country. 
These  other  churches  would  look  naturally  to  the  original 
church  as  to  a  mother,  and  the  elders  of  the  original  church 
would  naturally  have  a  care  for  the  others  as  they  arose. 
It  was  only  proper  to  show  Christian  respect  and  deference 
to  these  ;  but  this  respect  and  deference  was  soon  demanded, 
and  authority  to  require  it  was  asserted  by  those  who  were 
bishops  first. 

Again  :  as  churches  multiplied  and  with  them  also  elders 
multiplied,  it  was  necessary,  in  carrying  forward  the  work  of 
the  gospel,  for  the  officers  of  the  church  often  to  have  meetings 
for  consultation.  On  these  occasions  it  was  but  natural  and 
proper  for  the  seniors  to  preside  ;  but  instead  of  allowing 
this  to  remain  still  a  matter  of  choice  in  the  conducting  of 
each  successive  meeting  or  assembly,  it  was  claimed  as  a 
right  that  the  one  originally  chosen  should  hold  that  position 
for  life. 


1  D'Aubigne's  "  History  of  the  Reformation,"  book  vi,  chap,  iii,  par.  7. 

8"  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  i,  Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  A,  par.  5. 


EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

Thus  was  that  distinction  established  between  the  elders 
or  presbyters,  and  the  bishops.  Those  who  usurped  this  per- 
manent authority  and  office  took  to  themselves  exclusively 
the  title  of  "bishop,"  and  all  the  others  were  still  to  retain 
the  title  of  "presbyter."  The  presbyters  in  turn  assumed 
over  the  deacons  a  supremacy  and  authority  which  did  not 
belong  to  them,  and  all  together  —  bishops,  presbyters,  and 
deacons  —  held  themselves  to  be  superior  orders  in  the  church 
over  the  general  membership,  and  assumed  to  themselves  the 
title  of  "clergy,"  while  upon  the  general  membership  the 
term  "  laity"  was  conferred. 

In  support  of  these  three  orders  among  the  "clergy,"  it 
was  claimed  that  they  came  in  proper  succession  from  the 
high-priests,  the  priests,  and  the  Levites  of  the  Levitical  law. 
"Accordingly,  the  bishops  considered  themselves  as  invested 
with  a  rank  and  character  similar  to  those  of  the  high-priest 
among  the  Jews,  while  the  presbyters  represented  the  priests, 
and  the  deacons  the  Levites."  — JIbskeim.3 

These  distinctions  were  established  as  early  as  the  middle 
of  the  second  century.  This  led  to  a  further  and  most 
wicked  invention.  As  they  were  now  priests  and  Levites 
after  the  order  of  the  priesthood  of  the  former  dispensation, 
it  was  necessary  that  they  also  should  have  a  sacrifice  to 
offer.  Accordingly,  the  Lord's  supper  was  turned  into  "the 
unbloody  sacrifice."  Thus  arose  that  which  is  still  in  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  the  daily  "sacrifice"  of  the  mass. 
"The  comparison  of  the  Christian  oblations  with  the  Jewish 
victims  and  sacrifices,  produced  many  unnecessary  rites,  and 
by  degrees  corrupted  the  very  doctrine  of  the  holy  supper, 
which  was  converted,  sooner,  in  fact,  than  one  would  think, 
into  a  sacrifice."  —Mosheim*  With  this  also  came  a  splen- 
dor in  dress,  copied  from  that  of  the  former  real  priesthood. 

The  estimate  in  which  the  bishop  was  now  held  may  be 

8  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  ii,  part  ii,  chap,  ii,  par.  4,  Maclaine's  trans- 
lation. 

*  Id.,  chap,  iv,  par.  4,  Murdock's  translation. 


BISHOPRIC!  OF  ROME  ASSERTS  PRE-EMINENCE.     233 

gathered  from  the  following  words  of   a  document  of  the 
second  century:  — 

"It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  we  should  look  upon  the  bishop  even 
as  we  would  upon  the  Lord  himself."  "  It  is  well  to  reverence  both  God 
and  the  bishop.  He  who  honors  the  bishop  has  been  honored  of  God  ; 
he  who  does  anything  without  the  knowledge  of  the  bishop,  does  (in 
reality)  serve  the  devil."  —  Ignatius.5 

The  next  step  was  for  certain  bishops  to  assert  authority 
over  other  bishops  ;  and  the  plea  upon  which  this  was 
claimed  as  a  right,  was  that  the  bishops  of  those  churches 
which  had  been  established  by  the  apostles  were  of  right  to 
be  considered  as  superior  to  all  others.  Furthermore  it  was 
claimed  that  in  those  churches  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ 
had  been  preserved  in  the  greatest  purity.  As  the  bishops 
of  those  churches  claimed  to  be  the  repositories  of  the  true 
doctrine,  whenever  any  question  arose  upon  any  matter  of 
doctrine  or  interpretation  of  the  scripture,  appeal  was  made 
to  the  bishop  of  the  nearest  apostolic  church.  As  Rome 
was  the  capital  of  the  empire,  and  as  the  church  there 
claimed  direct  descent  not  only  from  one  but  from  two 
apostles,  it  soon  came  to  pass  that  the  church  of  Rome 
claimed  to  be  the  source  of  true  doctrine,  and  the  bishop 
of  that  church  to  be  supreme  over  all  other  bishops.  In 
the  latter  part  of  the  second  century,  during  the  episco- 
pate of  Elentherius,  A.  D.  176  to  192,  the  absolute  authority 
of  the  church  of  Rome  in  matters  of  doctrine  was  plainly 
asserted  in  the  following  words :  — 

"It  is  incumbent  to  obey  the  presbyters  who  are  in  the  church, — 
those  who,  as  I  have  shown,  possess  the  succession  from  the  apostles ; 
those  who,  together  with  the  succession  of  the  episcopate,  have  received 
the  certain  gift  of  truth,  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  the  father." 
"Since,  however,  it  would  be  very  tedious,  in  such  a  volume  as  this,  to 
reckon  up  the  successions  of  all  the  churches,  we  do  put  to  confusion  all 
those  who,  in  whatever  manner,  whether  by  an  evil  self-pleasing,  by 
vainglory,  or  by  blindness  and  perverse  opinion,  assemble  in  unauthor- 


5  "  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,"  chap,  vi,  and  "  To  the  Smyrnaeans,"  chap.  ix. 


234  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

ized  meetings  ;  (we  do  this,  I  say)  by  indicating  that  tradition  derived 
from  the  apostles,  of  the  very  great,  the  very  ancient,  and  universally- 
known  church  founded  and  organized  at  Rome  by  the  two  most  glorious 
apostles,  Peter  and  Paul  ;  as  also  (by  pointing  out)  the  faith  preached  to 
men,  which  comes  down  to  our  time  by  means  of  the  succession  of  the 
bishops.  For  it  is  a  matter  of  necessity  that  every  church  should  agree 
with  this  church,  on  account  of  its  pre-eminent  authority.  .  .  .  Since, 
therefore,  we  have  such  proofs,  it  is  not  necessary  to  seek  the  truth  among 
others  which  it  is  easy  to  obtain  from  the  church  ;  since  the  apos- 
tles, like  a  rich  man  depositing  his  money  in  a  bank,  lodged  in  her 
hands  most  copiously  all  things  pertaining  to  the  truth  :  so  that  every 
man,  whosoever  will,  can  draw  from  her  the  water  of  life.  For  she  is 
the  entrance  to  life;  all  others  are  thieves  and  robbers." — Irenaus.6 

When  this  authority  and  power  was  asserted  during  the 
bishopric  of  Eleutherius,  it  is  not  at  all  strange  that  his  im- 
mediate successor,  Victor,  A.  D.  192  to  202,  should  attempt  to 
carry  into  practice  the  authority  thus  claimed  for  him.  The 
occasion  of  it  was  the  question  of  the  celebration  of  what  is 
now  Easter,  as  already  related  in  the  preceding  chapter. 
This  action  of  Victor  is  pronounced  by  Bower  "the  first 
essay  of  papal  usurpation."  Thus  early  did  Rome  not  only 
claim  supremacy,  but  attempt  to  enforce  her  claim  of  suprem- 
acy, over  all  other  churches.  Such  was  the  arrogance  of  the 
bishops  of  Rome  at  the  beginning  of  the  third  century. 

The  character  of  the  bishopric  in  A.  D.  250  is  clearly  seen 
in  the  quotation  already  given  on  page  131  of  this  book  ; 
but  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader,  we  insert  it  again  in 
this  place  :  — 

"Not  a  few  bishops  who  ought  to  furnish  both  exhortation  and 
example  to  others,  despising  their  divine  charge,  became  agents  in  secular 
business,  forsook  their  throne,  deserted  their  people,  wandered  about 
over  foreign  provinces,  hunted  the  markets  for  gainful  merchandise, 
while  brethren  were  starving  in  the  church.  They  sought  to  possess 
money  in  hoards,  they  seized  estates  by  crafty  deceits,  they  increased 
their  gains  by  multiplying  usuries." — Cyprian.1 


6 "Against  Heresies,"  book  iv,  chap,  xxvi,  par.  2  ;  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  2; 
and  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  1. 
7  "  On  the  Lapsed,"  chap.  vi. 


CONTENTIONS  IN  ROME  AND   CARTHAGE.          235 

As  the  bishopric  became  more  exalted,  and  arrogated 
to  itself  more  authority,  the  office  became  an  object  of  un- 
worthy ambition  and  unholy  aspiration.  Arrogance  charac- 
terized those  who  were  in  power,  and  envy  those  who  were 
not.  And  whenever  a  vacancy  occurred,  unseemly  and 
wholly  unchristian  strife  arose  among  rival  presbyters  for 
the  vacant  seat.  "The  deacons,  beholding  the  presbyters 
thus  deserting  their  functions,  boldly  invaded  their  rights  and 
privileges  ;  and  the  effects  of  a  corrupt  ambition  were  spread 
through  every  rank  of  the  sacred  order."  —  Mosheim.* 

Cornelius  became  bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D.  251.  A  pres- 
byter of  the  same  church  aspired  to  the  same  office,  and  was 
supported  by  a  considerable  party  in  the  church,  and  also  by 
five  other  presbyters.  He  wrote  letters  to  Cyprian,  bishop 
of  Carthage,  charging  Cornelius  with  heinous  sins.  Corne- 
lius also  wrote  about  the  same  time  to  Cyprian,  who  thus 
learning  of  the  division  in  the  church  of  Rome,  called  to- 
gether in  council  the  bishops  of  his  province,  and  they  sent 
two  of  their  number  with  letters  to  Rome  to  inquire  into  the 
trouble.  The  church  in  Rome  immediately  sent  letters  in 
answer  to  the  bishops  in  Africa,  assuring  them  that  Cornelius 
had  been  properly  chosen,  and  was  worthy  of  the  situation. 
The  two  messengers  returning,  also  confirmed  the  testimony 
of  the  letters  by  a  report  of  their  own  investigations.  Upon 
this  the  African  bishops  sent  Cornelius  a  series  of  resolu- 
tions which  they  had  adopted  in  the  council  lately  held, 
with  respect  to  those  who  denied  the  faith  in  the  time  of 
the  persecution  by  Decius,  to  the  effect  that  all  such  should 
not  be  excluded  forever  from  the  church,  but  should  be 
admitted  after  doing  sufficient  penance  —  those  who  had 
bought  exemption  in  the  time  of  persecution  being  obliged 
to  do  longer  penance  than  others ;  —  and  if  while  doing 
penance  they  should  come  suddenly  to  the  point  of  death, 
they  should  be  received  into  the  church  at  once. 

Upon  receiving  the  resolutions,  Cornelius  called  a  council 

8  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  iii,  part  ii,  chap,  ii,  par.  4. 


236  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

of  sixty  bishops,  and  a  large  number  from  the  other  orders  of 
the  clergy.  Among  them  was  Novatian,  who  had  been 
opposed  to  Cornelius  for  the  office  of  bishop.  In  the  council 
he  likewise  opposed  the  resolution  sent  up  from  Africa.  He 
maintained  that  all  who  had  yielded  in  the  time  of  persecu- 
tion ought  never  again  to  be  admitted  to  the  church  upon  any 
terms  whatever.  The  majority,  however,  was  against  him, 
and  he  himself  was  turned  out  of  the  church.  Upon  this  he 
joined  with  a  presbyter  by  the  name  of  Novatus,  who  had 
been  turned  out  of  the  church  at  Carthage,  and  the  followers 
of  the  two  together  agreed  to  ordain  Novatian  a  bishop  in 
Rome.  Novatian  immediately  set  himself  in  opposition  to 
Cornelius.  This  party  then  sent  letters  to  the  other  churches 
round  about,  informing  them  of  the  ordination  of  Novatian, 
and  exhorting  them  not  to  communicate  with  any  who  had 
in  any  way  denied  the  faith  under  persecution.  Cornelius 
also  at  the  same  time  wrote  to  other  bishops  informing  them 
that  the  ordination  of  Novatian  was  irregular.  Thus  the 
division  and  the  controversy  spread  farther  and  farther. 

While  this  was  going  on  in  Rome,  there  was  also  a 
division  in  the  church  of  Carthage,  where  a  certain  Felicissi- 
mus  had  been  excommunicated,  whose  party  also  had  elected 
a  bishop  of  their  own,  by  the  name  of  Fortunatus.  Felicissi- 
mus  went  to  Rome,  hoping  to  win  Cornelius  to  his  side,  and 
the  messengers  of  Novatian  went  to  Carthage  to  gain  the 
favor  of  Cyprian  and  the  bishops  of  Africa  to  their  side. 
But  Cyprian  stood  by  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  carried  with 
him  the  bishops  of  Africa.  Novatian  sent  yet  other  mes- 
sengers into  Africa,  who  diligently  worked"  up  partisans 
there,  and  it  was  not  long  before  they  secured  the  ordination 
of  some  of  their  party  as  bishops.  These  newly  ordained 
bishops  asserted  their  right  to  exercise  the  office  of  bishop 
over  churches  connected  with  the  church  of  Rome,  instead 
of  the  regular  bishops  of  those  churches.  This  increased 
the  confusion,  which  spread  finally  throughout  the  provinces 
of  Africa.  This  became  a  matter  of  great  perplexity  to 


THE  BISHOPS   USURP   THE  PLACE  OF  CHRIST.       23Y 

Cornelius.  As  both  parties  were  continually  sending  their 
letters,  and  messengers,  and  embassies,  to  him,  and  as  both 
made  the  same  claims,  it  was  very  difficult  for  him  to  decide 
who  were  the  regular  Catholic  bishops.  But  Cyprian,  to 
relieve  this  perplexity,  drew  up  a  list  of  all  the  Catholic 
bishops  in  the  African  provinces,  and  sent  it  to  Cornelius  at 
Rome. 

These  discussions  gave  an  opportunity  for  the  further 
assertion  of  the  dignity  and  authority  of  the  bishopric. 
Cyprian,  "the  representative  of  the  episcopal  system" 
(JVeander9),  declared  that  — 

''The  church  is  founded  upon  the  bishops,  and  every  act  of  the  church  is 
controlled  by  these  same  rulers."  "Whence  you  ought  to  know  that  the 
bishop  is  in  the  church,  and  the  church  in  the  bishop  ;  and  if  any  one 
be  not  with  the  bishop,  that  he  is  not  in  the  church." 10 

He  insisted  that  God  made  the  bishops  and  the  bishops 
made  the  deacons,  and  argued  thus  :  — 

"  But  if  we  [bishops]  may  dare  anything  against  God  who  makes 
bishops,  deacons  may  also  dare  against  us  by  whom  they  are  made."11 

' '  The  epistle  of  Cyprian  to  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome, 
shows  the  height  to  which  the  episcopal  power  had  aspired 
before  the  religion  of  Christ  had  become  that  of  the  Roman 
empire.  The  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  even  of 
the  New,  in  which  honor  or  deference  is  paid  to  the  Hebrew 
pontificate,  are  recited  in  profuse  detail ;  implicit  obedience 
is  demanded  for  the  priest  of  God,  who  is  the  sole  infallible 
judge  or  delegate  of  Christ."  —Jfilman.™ 

Cornelius  was  succeeded  in  the  bishopric  of  Rome  by 
Lucius,  who  was  put  to  death  in  less  than  six  months,  and 
was  succeeded  by  Stephen,  A.  D.  253  to  258.  Soon  after 


9  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  i,  Section  Second, 
part  1,  div.  i,  B,  par.  5. 

10 Epistle  xxvi,  chap,  i,  and  epistle  Ixviii,  chap.  viii.     u  Epistle  Ixiv,  chap.  111. 
12  "  History  of  Christianity, "  book  iv,  chap,  i,  par.  22. 


238  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

Stephen's  election,  the  bishop  of  Lyons  in  Gaul  wrote  to 
inform  him  that  the  bishop  of  Aries  had  adopted  the  views 
and  discipline  of  Novatian.  He  also  wrote  to  Cyprian  to 
the  same  effect.  About  the  same  time  a  question  involving 
much  the  same  point  was  causing  a  difficulty  in  Spain. 
There  two  bishops,  Basilides  and  Martial,  had  been  deposed 
by  a  council  of  bishops,  and  two  others  were  appointed  in 
their  places.  They  were  both  charged  with  surrendering  the 
Scriptures  in  the  time  of  persecution.  Basilides  went  to 
Rome  to  secure  the  support  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  in  his 
desire  to  be  re-instated.  In  this  he  succeeded,  and  returned 
to  Spain,  and  there  exercised  his  office  as  bishop  as  he  had 
formerly  done,  and  Martial  followed  his  example.  Then  the 
bishops  of  Spain  sent  letters  and  deputies  to  Carthage,  asking 
the  advice  and  help  of  the  African  bishops  ;  and  the  deputies 
whom  they  sent  were  the  two  bishops  whom  they  had  put  in 
the  place  of  Basilides  and  Martial.  A  council  of  twenty- 
eight  bishops  was  held  in  Carthage,  presided  over  by  Cyprian. 
Having  only  a  one-sided  view  of  the  case,  as  the  bishop  of 
Rome  had  had  on  the  other  side,  they  indorsed  the  action  of 
the  church  of  Spain,  and  decided  that  Basilides  and  Martial 
ought  not  to  be  acknowledged  as  bishops ;  that  it  was  not 
lawful  to  commune  with  them  ;  and  that  whosoever  should 
do  so  ought  to  be  excommunicated. 

Not  long  afterward,  there  arose  another  subject  of  con- 
troversy, which  caused  much  contention  with  far-reaching 
consequences.  As  the  bishops  arrogated  to  themselves  more 
and  more  authority,  both  in  discipline  and  doctrine,  "her- 
etics "  increased.  Whosoever  might  disagree  with  the  bishop, 
was  at  once  branded  as  a  heretic,  and  was  cut  off  from  his 
communion,  as  Diotrephes  had  counted  as  a  heretic  even  the 
apostle  John.  Upon  this  point  the  representative  of  the 
episcopal  system  further  declared  :  — 

"Neither  have  heresies  arisen,  nor  have  schisms  originated,  from  any 
other  source  than  from  this,  that  God's  priest  is  not  obeyed  ;  nor  do  they 
ponsider  that  there  is  one  person  for  the  time  priest  in  the  church,  and 


AN  EPISCOPAL   PUNIC    WAR.  239 

for  the  time  judge  in  the  stead  of  Christ ;  whom,  if  according  to  divine 
teaching,  the  whole  fraternity  should  obey,  no  one  would  stir  up  any- 
thing against  the  college  of  priests  ;  no  one,  after  the  divine  judgment, 
after  the  suffrage  of  the  people,  after  the  consent  of  the  co-bishops, 
would  make  himself  a  judge,  not  now  of  the  bishop,  but  of  God.  No 
one  would  rend  the  church  by  a  division  of  the  unity  of  Christ." — 
Cyprian.™ 

He  therefore  argued  that  if  any  person  was  outside  of 
this  system  of  episcopal  unity,  and  was  not  obedient  to 
the  bishop,  this  was  all  the  evidence  necessary  to  demonstrate 
that  he  was  a  heretic.  Consequently  he  declared  that  no  one 
ought  "  even  to  be  inquisitive  as  to  what"  any  one  "teaches, 
so  long  as  he  teaches  out  of  the  pale  of  unity."  u  In  this 
way  the  truth  itself  could  easily  be  made  heresy. 

By  this  system,  "  heretics  "  soon  became  numerous,  and, 
as  many  persons  were  changing  their  residence  from  place  to 
place,  a  question  was  raised  whether  baptism  by  heretics  was 
valid.  Some  bishops  of  important  churches  held  that  it  was, 
others  held  that  it  was  not.  Yet  up  to  this  time  all  bishops 
and  churches  were  allowed  to  decide  this  for  themselves.  A 
council  of  bishops  in  Africa  and  JNumidia,  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  third  century,  had  established  in  those  provinces 
the  discipline  that  all  heretics  must  be  re-baptized  when  ap- 
plying for  admission  to  any  of  those  churches.  This  practice 
was  also  adopted  in  Cappadocia,  Galatia,  Phrygia,  Cilicia, 
and  neighboring  provinces,  by  a  council  held  at  Iconium  in 
Phrygia,  A.  D.  230.  Pontus  and  Egypt  followed  the  same 
course,  but  Italy,  Gaul,  and  Spain  held,  on  the  contrary, 
that  baptism  by  heretics  was  valid,  it  mattered  not  what  the 
heresy  might  be. 

Thus  stood  the  question  when  Stephen  became  bishop 
of  Rome.  Soon  after  the  difficulty  with  the  Spanish 
bishops,  some  bishops  of  Numidia  and  Mauritania  sent  in- 
quiries to  Cyprian,  raising  anew  the  question  of  baptism  by 
heretics.  A  council  of  seventy-one  bishops  was  held  at 
Carthage,  which  declared  that  the  practice  of  re-baptizing 
should  be  invariably  followed.  The  council  sent  a  letter  to 

13  Epistle  liv,  chap.  v.  u/d.,  li,  chap.  xiiv. 

21 


2 -tO  THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

Stephen  of  Home,  reporting  their  decision,  and  asking  him 
to  agree  with  it.  Stephen  answered  the  council  by  letter  in 
which  he  first  called  particular  attention  to  the  great  dignity 
of  the  bishopric  of  Rome,  and  the  honor  which  it  derived  from 
its  succession  to  the  apostle  Peter.  Next  he  informed  them 
that  he  absolutely  rejected  and  condemned  their  decrees. 
He  then  threatened  to  cut  off  from  his  communion  all  who 
should  presume  to  disobey  by  re-baptizing  any  heretics,  and 
finally  not  only  ordered  Cyprian  to  change  his  opinion  on 
the  subject,  and  practice  accordingly,  but  declared  him  to 
be  "a  false  Christ,"  a  "false  apostle,"  and  a  "deceitful 
workman." 

On  receipt  of  Stephen's  letter,  Cyprian  called  another 
council  of  eighty -five  bishops,  which  met  September  1,  A.  D. 
256.  The  council  canvassed  the  whole  subject  anew,  came  to 
their  original  conclusion,  and  again  sent  word  by  messengers 
to  Stephen,  who  not  only  refused  to  receive  them  at  all,  but 
forbade  all  the  church  of  Rome  either  to  receive  or  entertain 
them  in  any  manner.  He  then  proceeded  to  execute  his 
threat,  and  excommunicated  the  whole  council,  and  wThoever 
held  the  same  opinion  as  the  council.  This  excluded 
from  his  communion  the  bishops  of  Africa,  Numidia, 
Mauritania,  Egypt,  Cilicia,  Galatia,  and  Cappadocia.  He 
endeavored  by  a  letter,  however,  to  win  the  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria to  his  view,  but  failed. 

Cyprian  wrote  to  Firmilian,  bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappa- 
docia, telling  him  of  Stephen's  conduct.  In  reply  Firmilian 
wrote  to  Cyprian  a  letter  in  which  he  compared  Stephen  to 
Judas  Iscariot,  and  branded  him  as  "inhuman,"  "auda- 
cious," "insolent,"  "wicked,"  "impious,"  "schismatic,"  "a 
defamer  of  Peter  and  Paul,"  and  "worse  than  all  heretics." 
This  Firmilian  is  pronounced  "one  of  the  most  eminent 
prelates  at  that  time  in  the  church,  both  for  piety  and 
learning  ;  "  but  Cyprian  was  not  far  behind  him  and  Stephen 
in  eminence  for  this  kind  of  piety.  For  he  wrote  to  the 
bishop  of  Sobrata  a  letter  in  which  he  charged  Stephen 


THE  BISIIOPRIC  OF  ANTIOGH.  241 

with  "  pride  and  impertinence,  self-contradiction  and  igno- 
rance, with  indifference,  obstinacy,  and  childishness,"  and 
called  him  "a  favorer  and  abettor  of  heretics  against  the 
church  of  God.'"  -Bower.™  Stephen  died  August  2,  A.  D. 
257,  and  thus  was  stopped  the  generous  flow  of  pious  phrases. 

Stephen  was  succeeded  by  Sixtus  II,  who  held  the 
office  about  a  year,  and  was  put  to  death  in  the  persecu- 
tion under  Valerian.  He  was  succeeded  July  22,  A.  D.  259, 
by  JDionysius.  At  this  time  there  was  another  Dionysius,  who 
was  bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  who  had  entered  into  a  cer- 
tain controversy  with  Sabellius  upon  the  subject  of  the 
trinity.  In  the  arguments  which  he  published,  some  per- 
sons thought  they  discovered  heresy,  and  reported  it  to  the 
bishop  of  Rome,  who  called  a  council  of  the  bishops  of 
Italy,  and  requested  Dionysius  to  answer  the  accusation 
and-give  an  explanation  of  his  faith.  Dionysius  addressed 
to  the  bishop  of  Rome  a  "confutation  and  apology,"  ex- 
plaining the  expressions  in  his  former  writings,  which  it 
was  charged  contained  heresy. 

During  the  bishopric  of  Dionysius,  there  occurred  the 
case  of  Paul  of  Samosata,  who  at  that  time  was  bishop  of 
Antioch,  an  account  of  which  will  illustrate  the  condition 
of  the  bishoprics  of  the  principal  cities  of  the  empire  at 
this  time. 

The  bishops  of  the  East  said  of  Paul  that  before  his 
connection  with  the  church  he  was  poor  almost  to  beggary, 
and  that  he  had  received  neither  wealth  from  his  father 
nor  obtained  possessions  by  any  art  or  trade  or  business, 
yet  hud  now  acquired  excessive  wealth  by  his  iniquities  and 
sacrileges  ;  that  by  various  means  which  he  employed,  he 
had  exacted  and  extorted  from  the  brethren,  promising  to 
aid  them  for  a  reward  ;  that  he  took  advantage  of  those 
who  were  in  difficulty,  to  compel  them  to  give  him  money 
to  be  free  from  their  oppressors  ;  that  he  made  merchan- 
dise of  piety  ;  that  he  affected  lofty  things,  and  assumed  too 
great  things,  attaining  worldly  dignity,  wishing  rather  to  be 

15  "  Lives  of  the  Popes,"  Stephen,  par.  8. 


THE  EXALTATION  OF   THE  BISHOPRIC. 

called  a  magistrate  than  a  bishop  ;  that  he  went  strutting 
through  the  forum  reading  letters  and  repeating  them  aloud 
as  he  walked  ;  that  in  public  he  was  escorted  by  multitudes 
going  before  and  following  after  him ;  that  he  brought 
reproach  upon  the  faith  by  his  pomp  and  haughtiness ; 
that  out  of  vanity  and  proud  pretensions  he  contrived  in 
ecclesiastical  assemblies  to  catch  at  glory  and  empty  shad- 
ows, and  to  confound  the  minds  of  the  more  simple  ;  that 
he  had  prepared  himself  a  tribunal  and  a  high  throne  sep- 
arated from  the  people  like  a  ruler  of  this  world,  rather  than 
a  disciple  of  Christ ;  that  he  was  in  the  habit  of  slapping  his 
hand  upon  his  thigh  and  stamping  upon  the  tribunal  with 
his  foot,  reproving  and  insulting  those  who  would  not  ap- 
plaud his  sermons ;  that  he  magnified  himself  not  as  a 
bishop  but  as  a  sophist  and  juggler  ;  that  he  stopped  the 
singing  of  psalms  in  honor  of  Christ,  and  had  prepared 
choirs  of  women  to  sing  other  compositions  at  the  great  fes- 
tivals ;  that  he  hired  deacons  and  presbyters  of  neighbor- 
ing districts  to  preach  his  views  of  the  trinity  ;  that  he  had 
with  him  certain  women  whom  the  people  of  Antioch  called 
"adopted  sisters;"  that  he  allowed  his  presbyters  and 
deacons  also  to  follow  the  same  practice  ;  that  he  had  made 
his  presbyters  and  deacons  rich  by  indulging  their  covetous 
dispositions,  and  had  thus  bought  their  favor,  so  that  none 
of  them  would  accuse  him  of  the  evil  doing  ;  that  many 
bishops  beside  Paul  had  indulged  themselves  in  the  same 
things,  or  had  incurred  suspicion  of  it,  especially  in  the 
matter  of  the  adopted  sisters  ;  that  although  Paul  had  dis- 
missed one  of  these,  he  retained  two  others  with  him,  bloom- 
ing in  age  and  eminent  in  beauty,  taking  them  with  him 
wherever  he  went,  indulging  in  luxury  and  surfeiting  ;  that 
although  men  around  him  were  groaning  and  lamenting  be- 
cause of  these  things,  they  were  so  much  afraid  of  his 
tyranny  and  power  that  they  did  not  venture  to  accuse  him  ; 
and  finally,  that  all  these  things  might  be  borne  with  in  the 
hope  of  correcting  the  evil,  were  it  not  that  he  had  trifled 


DISGRACEFUL   CHARACTER   OF   THE  BISHOPRIC.      243 

away  the  sacred  mystery,  and  paraded  his  execrable  heresy.18 

On  account  of  Paul's  heresy,  a  council  of  eighty  bishops 
was  assembled  at  Antioch.  Paul  was  excommunicated,  pro- 
nounced deposed  from  the  bishopric,  and  the  council  on  their 
own  authority  appointed  a  successor.  Their  assumed  authority 
to  appoint  a  successor  without  consulting  the  membership  of 
the  church  of  Antioch,  caused  yet  a  larger  number  to  take 
sides  with  Paul,  because  such  proceeding  was  decidedly 
irregular. 

At  this  time  Zenobia  was  queen  of  the  East,  and  with  her 
Paul  was  rather  a  favorite.  Under  her  protection  and  upon 
the  irregularity  of  the  proceedings  of  the  council,  he  openly 
for  four  years  defied  the  decrees  of  the  council,  and  held 
his  place  as  bishop  of  Antioch.  When  Aurelian,  in  A.  D. 
2YO,  went  to  the  East  to  dethrone  Zenobia,  the  bishops 
appealed  to  him  to  enforce  their  decrees  and  remove  Paul. 
Aurelian  referred  the  case  for  decision  to  the  bishops  of 
Rome  and  Italy.  Before  this  controversy  was  ended, 
Dionysius  died,  and  his  successor,  Felix,  decided  against 
Paul.  Then  according  to  the  decree  that  Aurelian  had  al- 
ready pronounced,  Paul  was  removed  from  the  office  and 
emoluments  of  the  bishopric  of  Antioch. 

We  do  not  know  whether  the  charges  brought  against 
Paul  were  all  true  or  not,  as  those  who  made  the  charges  were 
all  his  enemies.  But  whether  they  were  true  or  not,  is  not 
particularly  important ;  because  if  they  were  true,  it  is  not  to 
the  credit  of  the  bishopric  of  that  time,  for  they  clearly  in- 
volve other  bishops  in  the  most  serious  moral  delinquencies 
of  Paul.  On  the  other  hand  if  the  charges  were  not  true,  then 
that  a  company  of  eighty  bishops  should  falsely  make  such 
charges,  is  scarcely  less  to  the  credit  of  the  bishopric  of  the 
time,  than  the  other  would  be  if  it  were  true. 

In  either  case,  therefore,  it  is  certain  that  the  statement 
of  Eusebius  of  the  condition  of  the  bishopric  in  302,  when 
the  Diocletian  persecution  began,  is  strictly  true.  ' '  They  were 
sunk  in  negligence  and  sloth,  one  envying  and  reviling  an- 

16  "Eusebius's  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vii,  chap.  xxx. 


244  THE  EXALTATION  OF  THE  BISHOPRIC. 

other  in  different  ways,  and  were  almost  on  the  point  of  tak- 
ing up  arms  against  each  other,  and  were  assailing  each  other 
with  words  as  with  darts  and  spears,  prelates  inveighing 
against  prelates,  and  people  rising  up  against  people,  and 
hypocrisy  and  dissimulation  had  arisen  to  the  greatest  height 
of  malignity."  Also  some  who  appeared  to  be  pastors  were 
inflamed  against  each  other  with  mutual  strifes,  only  accumu- 
lating quarrels  and  threats,  rivalship,  hostility,  and  hatred  to 
each  other,  only  anxious  to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind 
of  sovereignty  for  themselves. 

The  Scripture  was  fulfilled.     There  had  come  a  falling 
away  ;  there  was  a  self-exaltation  of  the  bishopric  ;  and  THE 

TIME  WAS    COME   WHEN    THE    MAN  OF  SIN    SHOULD    BE  REVEALED. 


COXSTANTIXE. 


CHAPTER   X. 


THE   RELIGION   OF   CONSTANTINE. 

MUCH  research  and  great  effort  have  been  made  to  discover 
the  time  of  Constantino's  conversion  to  Christianity. 
One  writer  dates  it  at  his  accession  in  306,  another  in  312, 
another  in  321,  yet  another  not  till  323,  and  still  another 
about  327.  Others  put  it  at  his  death-bed  baptism,  while 
still  others  insist  that  he  never  was  a  Christian.  When  he 
became  a  Christian,  or  whether  he  ever  did,  is  an  interesting 
question  even  at  this  time,  and  we  propose  to  set  forth  as 
fully  as  in  our  power  lies,  facts  by  which  any  person  can 
decide  this  question. 

We  have  already  given  the  history  of  Constantino's 
accession  and  onward  to  the  defeat  of  Maxentius.  We  have 
also  shown  that  at  the  time  of  his  accession  to  the  throne  he 
was  a  devout  worshiper  of  the  sun.  We  have  related  how 
an  incursion  of  the  Franks  into  Gaul  drew  him  from  Aries 
to  the  Rhine,  and  gave  Maximian  an  opportunity  to  usurp 
the  imperial  authority  in  his  absence  ;  and  how  he  was 
called  by  this  usurpation  from  his  war  with  the  Franks  to 
save  his  own  imperial  authority.  As  he  was  about  to  return 
to  the  Rhine  to  enter  again  upon  the  war  with  the  Franks, 
he  received  the  intelligence  that  they  had  retired  from  Gaul 
to  their  own  country  ;  and  to  express  his  gratitude  —  A.  D. 
308 — "he  gave  public  thanks  in  a  celebrated  temple  of 
Apollo,  probably  at  Autun  (Augustodunum),  and  presented 
a  magnificent  offering  to  the  god." — JVeander.1 

'"History  of  the  Christian  "Religion,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First,  part  i,  A,  par.  11. 

[245] 


246  THE  RELIGION  OF  CONSTANTINE. 

We  have  also  shown  how  events  rapidly  culminated  in 
the  war  between  him  and  Maxentius,  and  of  his  attitude 
toward  Christians,  as  expressed  in  the  Edict  of  Milan.  "Up 
to  this  period,  all  that  we  know  of  Constantine's  religion 
would  imply  that  he  was  outwardly,  and  even  zealously, 
pagan.  In  a  public  oration,  his  panegyrist  extols  the  magnifi- 
cence of  his  offerings  to  the  gods.  His  victorious  presence 
was  not  merely  expected  to  restore  more  than  their  former 
splendor  to  the  Gaulish  cities  ruined  by  barbaric  incursions, 
but  sumptuous  temples  were  to  arise  at  his  bidding,  to  pro- 
pitiate the  deities,  particularly  Apollo,  his  tutelary  god. 
The  medals  struck  for  these  victories  are  covered  with  the 
symbols  of  paganism."  —  Milman* 

But  about  the  latter  part  of  the  year  311  or  early  in  312, 
there  certainly  came  such  a  change  in  his  mind  as  to  lead 
him  to  favor  Christianity.  The  influences  that  caused  this 
change  will  be  more  fully  set  forth  hereafter.  In  this  place 
it  is  necessary  merely  to  say  that  there  was  enmity  between 
him  and  Galerius,  which  of  itself  naturally  threw  Constantine 
into  opposition  to  the  plans  and  ambitions  of  that  emperor. 
Galerius  had  done  all  that  he  could  to  keep  Constantine  from 
escaping  from  the  dominions  of  Diocletian  to  those  of  Con- 
stantius.  Constantine  knew  that  the  purpose  of  Galerius  in 
this  was  nothing  but  evil,  if  not  death,  to  him.  By  extra- 
ordinary speed  he  defeated  the  scheme  of  Galerius  in  this, 
and  when  he  was  made  emperor  in  Britain,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  purposes  of  Galerius  were  almost  wholly  disconcerted. 
This,  we  repeat,  naturally  made  Constantine  an  opponent  of 
the  plans  of  Galerius.  Therefore  when  Galerius  spent  his 
strongest  efforts  in  behalf  of  the  pagan  party  in  the  State, 
Constantine  naturally  leaned  toward  the  other.  In  this  also 
he  had  the  example  of  his  humane  father,  who,  although  not 
able  to  defeat  wholly  the  edicts  of  persecution,  greatly 
modified  their  effects.  Another  thing  that  influenced  him  in 
this  direction  was  because,  as  he  himself  said, — 

2  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  33. 


HIS  LOW  UTILITARIANISM.  247 

"My  father  revered  the  Christian  God,  arid  uniformly  prospered, 
while  the  emperors  who  worshiped  the  heathen  gods,  died  a  miserable 
death  ;  therefore,  that  I  may  enjoy  a  happy  life  and  reign,  I  will  imitate 
the  example  of  my  father,  and  join  myself  to  the  cause  of  the  Christians, 
who  are  growing  daily,  while  the  heathen  are  diminishing."3 

And  "this  low  utilitarian  consideration  weighed  heavily 
in  the  mind  of  an  ambitious  captain,  who  looked  forward  to 
the  highest  seat  of  power  within  the  gift  of  his  age." — 
SchajfS  It  is  manifest  that  the  only  consideration  that 
operated  upon  his  mind  at  this  time  was  this  utilitarian  one, 
and  that  whatever  favor  he  felt  toward  Christians  so  far  was 
merely  as  a  matter  of  policy,  with  the  hope  that  by  this  he 
might  be  aided  in  his  aspirations  to  the  sole  rulership  of  the 
empire.  This  is  confirmed  by  another  in  these  words  :  — 

"But  to  Constantine  himself,  if  at  this  time  Christianity  had  obtained 
any  hold  upon  his  mind,  it  was  now  the  Christianity  of  the  warrior,  as 
subsequently  it  was  that  of  the  statesman.  It  was  the  military  com- 
mander who  availed  himself  of  the  assistance  of  any  tutelar  divinity  who 
might  insure  success  to  his  daring  enterprise."  —  Milman.5 

Such  was  his  attitude  toward  Christianity  before  the 
defeat  of  Maxentius.  Nor  was  there  afterward  any  material 
change,  either  in  his  profession  or  his  character.  In  the 
same  manner  as  the  cruel  emperors  before  him,  at  the  defeat 
of  Maxentius,  not  content  with  the  death  of  that  emperor 
himself  and  a  large  number  of  his  adherents,  he  executed 
vengeance  also  on  his  infant  son.  "Utterly  devoid  of  faith 
in  anything  else  except  himself  and  his  own  destiny,  unyield- 
ing in  that  ambition  to  exercise  dominion,  which  nerved  him 
for  the  doubtful  war  against  Maxentius,  he  regarded  both 
mankind  and  religion  with  pity  and  contempt,  and  sought  to 
rule  men  for  their  good  and  his  own  glory,  by  means  of  any 
faith  which  they  might  prefer  ;  and  hence,  as  Christianity 
became  more  known  and  popular,  he  identified  himself  with 
it  more  and  more,  only  in  order  to  foster  any  agency  which 

3  Schaff,  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  2,  par.  15.          *  Id. 
6  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  41. 


248  THE  RELIGION  OF  CON8TANTINE. 

seemed  to  be  available  in  the  work  of  consolidating  the  war- 
ring factions  of  the  empire,  and  securing  the  permanency  of 
his  throne."  -  The  Author  of  "  Arius  the  Libyan." 

At  what  time  he  made  the  labarum  is  not  certainly  known  ; 
but  whenever  it  was,  it  was  simply  another  instance  of  his 
policy  in  pretending  to  favor  the  church  party  while  still  re- 
taining his  paganism.  For  when  he  constructed  the  labarum, 
he  simply  "  changed  the  heathen  labarum  into  a  standard  of 
the  Christian  cross  with  the  Greek  monogram  of  Christ, 
which  he  had  also  put  upon  the  shields  of  his  soldiers." 
"  On  the  top  of  the  shaft  was  a  crown  composed  of  gold  and 
precious  stones,  and  containing  the  monogram  of  Christ ; 
and  just  under  this  crown  was  a  likeness  of  the  emperor  and 
his  sons  in  gold. "  •  —  Schaff.  ° 

That  by  this  emblem  Constantine  intended  to  profess  to 
the  church  party  his  alliance  with  them,  is  evident,  yet  he 
did  not  propose  to  forsake  his  paganism  ;  for  the  object  in 
placing  there  the  likenesses  of  himself  and  his  sons  was  that 
they  might  be  worshiped  by  the  pagan  part  of  his  army. 
This  is  confirmed  in  the  following  words  :  — 

"Even  in  the  labarum,  if  the  initiated  eyes  of  the  Christian  soldiery 
could  discern  the  sacred  symbol  of  Christ  indistinctly  glittering  above  the 
cross,  there  appeared,  either  embossed  on  the  beam  below  or  embroidered 
on  the  square  purple  banner  which  depended  from  it,  the  bust  of  the  em- 
peror and  those  of  his  family,  to  whom  the  heathen  part  of  his  army 
might  pay  their  homage  of  veneration."  "And  so,  for  the  first  time,  the 
meek  and  peaceful  Jesus  became  the  God  of  battle  ;  and  the  cross, 
the  holy  sign  of  Christian  redemption,  a  banner  of  bloody  strife."  — 
Mil-man.1 

In  honor  of  his  triumph  over  Maxentius,  a  statue  of  him- 
self was  erected  in  the  Roman  forum  —  A.  D.  316.  In  his 
right  hand  was  the  labarum  with  the  inscription, — 

"By  virtue  of  this  salutary  sign,  which  is  the  true  symbol  of  valor,  I 
have  preserved  and  liberated  your  city  from  the  yoke  of  tyranny."  — 
Eusebius.8 

6  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol  iii,  \  2,  par.  24,  and  note  2. 

7  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii.  chap.  I,  par.  42,  39. 

8  "  Life  of  Constautine,"  book  i,  chap.  xl. 


PAGAN  AND  APOSTATE   CHRISTIAN.  249 

Afterward  a  triumphal  arch  was  also  built  in  Rome  to 
commemorate  the  victory  at  the  Milvian  bridge,  in  which  his 
ambiguous  relationship  between  the  two  religions  is  again 
displayed  :  — 

'The  inscription  on  this  arch  of  Constantino  ascribes  his  victory 
over  the  hated  tyrant,  not  only  to  his  master  mind,  but  indefinitely  also 
to  the  impulse  of  Deity,  by  which  a  Christian  would  naturally  under- 
stand the  true  God,  while  a  heathen,  like  the  orator  Nazarius,  in  his 
eulogy  on  Coustantine,  might  take  it  for  the  celestial  guardian  power  of 
the  '  urbs  (cterna'  [the  eternal  city]."  — 


Again  :  after  the  defeat  of  Maxentius  and  his  triumphal 
entry  into  the  city  of  Rome,  though  he  declined  to  celebrate 
the  pagan  rite  of  going  to  the  Capitol  to  offer  sacrifice  to 
Jupiter  and  the  gods,  he  restored  the  pagan  temples,  and 
assumed  the  title  of  Pontifex  Maximum.  And  when  some 
pagans  of  Africa  brought  to  him  the  head  of  Maxentius,  he 
granted  as  a  reward  that  the  province  of  Africa  should  be 
permitted  to  establish  a  priesthood  and  a  worship  in  honor  of 
the  family  of  Constantine. 

We  have  before  related  that  in  313  jointly  with  Licinius 
he  issued  the  Edict  of  Milan,  which  "confirmed  to  each 
individual  of  the  Roman  world  the  privilege  of  choosing  and 
professing  his  own  religion."  Shortly  after  this  he  openly 
patronized  the  Catholic  Church,  and  then  the  Edict  of  Milan 
was  reversed  in  his  part  of  the  dominion,  "and  the  sects 
who  dissented  from  the  Catholic  Church  were  afflicted  and 
oppressed."  Soon  afterward  he  exempted  the  Catholic- 
clergy  from  all  public  offices  and  obligations  ;  yet  in  A.  D. 
317,  his  coins  still  bore  the  pagan  symbols.  In  A.  D.  321,  to 
please  the  bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church  he  issued  an  edict 
commanding  judges,  townspeople,  and  mechanics  to  rest 
on  Sunday.  Yet  in  this  also  his  paganism  was  still  manifest, 
as  the  edict  required  rest  on  "the  venerable  day  of  the  sun," 
and  "enjoined  the  observance,  or  rather  forbade  the  public 
desecration,  of  Sunday,  not  under  the  name  of  Sabbat'int,  or 
Dies  Domini,  but  under  its  old  astrological  and  heathen  title, 

9  "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  2,  par.  25. 


250  THE  RELIGION  OF   CONSTANTINE. 

Dies  Solis,  familiar  to  all  his  subjects,  so  that  the  law  was 
as  applicable  to  the  worshipers  of  Hercules,  Apollo,  and 
Mithras,  as  to  the  Christians."  —  Schaff. 10 

Another  considerable  authority  confirms  this  fact  in  the 
following  statement :  — 

"To  fully  understand  the  provisions  of  this  legislation,  the  peculiar 
position  of  Constantine  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  He  was  not 
himself  free  from  all  remains  of  heathen  superstition.  It  seems  certain 
that  before  his  conversion  he  had  been  particularly  devoted  to  the  wor- 
ship of  Apollo,  the  sun-god.  .  .  .  The  problem  before  him  was  to  legislate 
for  the  new  faith  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  seem  entirely  inconsistent  with 
his  old  practices,  and  not  to  come  in  conflict  with  the  prejudices  of  his  pagan 
subjects.  These  facts  serve  to  explain  the  peculiarities  of  this  decree. 
He  names  the  holy  day,  not  the  Lord's  day,  but  the  '  day  of  the  sun,'  the 
heathen  designation,  and  thus  at  once  seems  to  identify  it  with  his  former 
Apollo-worship."  —  Rev.  Oeo.  Elliott.11 

Another  excellent  authority  remarks  upon  this  as  fol- 
lows :  - 

"It  is  the  day  of  the  sun,  which  is  to  be  observed  by  the  general 
veneration.  The  courts  were  to  be  closed,  and  the  noise  and  tumult  of 
public  business  and  legal  litigation  were  no  longer  to  violate  the  repose 
of  the  sacred  day.  But  the  believer  in  tJie  new  paganism,  of  which  the 
solar  worship  was  the  characteristic,  might  acquiesce  without  scruple  in 
the  sanctity  of  the  first  day  of  the  week."  —  Milman.12 

And  yet  another  adds  the  following  pointed  testimony  :  — 

"The  same  tenacious  adherence  to  the  ancient  god  of  light  has  left 
its  trace,  even  to  our  own  time,  on  one  of  the  most  sacred  and  universal 
of  Christian  institutions.  The  retention  of  the  old  pagan  name  of  'Dies 
Solis,'  or  '  Sunday,'  for  the  weekly  Christian  festival,  is,  in  great  meas- 
ure, owing  to  the  union  of  pagan  and  Christian  sentiment  with  which  the 
first  day  of  the  week  was  recommended  by  Constantine  to  his  subjects, 
pagan  and  Christian  alike,  as  the  '  venerable  day  of  the  sun.'  ...  It  was 
his  mode  of  harmonizing  the  discordant  religions  of  the  empire  under  one 
common  institution." —  Stanley.™ 


10  Id.,  \  75,  par.  5. 

"Fletcher  (five  hundred  dollar)   Prize  Essay,  "Abiding  Sabbath,"  p.   229. 
Copyrighted  and  published  by  American  Tract  Society,  1884. 

12  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  44. 

13  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  15. 


HIS  PERJURY  AND   CRUELTY.  251 

The  next  day  after  issuing  this  Sunday  law,  that  is,  March 
8,  A.  D.  321,  he  published  another  edict,  in  which  he  "ex- 
pressly ordains,  that  whenever  lightning  should  strike  the  im- 
perial palace  or  any  other  public  building,  the  haruspices, 
according  to  ancient  usage,  should  be  consulted  as  to  what  it 
might  signify,  and  a  careful  report  of  the  answer  should  be 
drawn  up  for  his  use. "  And  by  yet  another  "  law  of  the  same 
year,  he  declares  also  the  employment  of  heathen  magic,  for 
good  ends,  as  for  the  prevention  or  healing  of  diseases,  for 
the  protection  of  harvests,  for  the  prevention  of  rain  and  of 
hail,  to  be  permitted,  and  in  such  expressions,  too,  as  certainly 
betray  a  faith  in  the  efficacy  of  these  pretended  supernatural 
means,  unless  the  whole  is  to  be  ascribed  simply  to  the  legal 
forms  of  paganism."  —  Neander.u 

Meanwhile  Constantine  had  been  drawing  closer  to  the 
bishops,  and  bestowing  favors  on  the  Catholic  Church, 
the  full  account  of  which  will  be  given  in  the  following 
chapters.  By  this  time,  therefore,  he  could  afford  to  hold 
the  profession  of  the  two  religions  upon  an  equal  balance. 
Accordingly,  now  "  his  coins  bore  on  the  one  side  the  letters 
of  the  name  of  Christ ;  on  the  other  the  figure  of  the  sun- 
god,  and  the  inscription,  'Sol  invictus^  (the  unconquerable 
sun),  as  if  he  could  not  bear  to  relinquish  the  patronage  of 
the  bright  luminary  which  represented  to  him,  as  to  Augustus 
and  to  Julian,  his  own  guardian  Deity."  —Stanley.™ 

In  A.  D.  315  there  had  been  war  between  Constantine  and 
Licinius.  After  two  battles,  a  peace  was  concluded  which 
continued  till  323,  when,  "without  any  previous  injury," 
but  out  of  sheer  ambition  and  "  a  love  of  power  that  would 
brook  no  rival,"  and  "  at  the  expense  of  truth  and  humanity," 
Constantine  entered  again  upon  a  war  with  Licinius.  On 
July  3  was  fought  the  battle  of  Hadrianople,  in  which 
Licinius  was  defeated  with  a  loss  of  thirty-four  thousand  men. 

u "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First,  part  i,  A, 
par.  33. 

15  "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  7d.,  par.  14. 
22 


252  THE  RELIGION  OF  CON8TANTINE. 

He  retreated  to  Byzantium,  where  Constantine  beseiged  him. 
When  Constantine  was  about  to  take  the  city,  Licinius 
deserted  it  and  passed  over  to  Asia.  Constantine  followed, 
and  another  battle  was  fought  at  Chrysopolis,  where  Licinius 
was  again  defeated  with  so  great  a  loss  of  men  that  he  was 
compelled  to  sue  for  peace.  His  wife  Constantia,  the  sister 
of  Constantine,  interceded  with  her  brother  in  favor  of  her 
husband,  and  obtained  from  him  a  solemn  promise,  con- 
firmed by  an  oath,  that  if  Licinius  would  resign  all  claims 
to  the  office  of  emperor,  he  should  be  allowed  to  pass  the 
rest  of  his  life  in  peace  and  as  became  his  station.  Thes- 
salonica  was  appointed  as  the  place  of  his  dwelling,  or  as  it 
proved,  his  imprisonment ;  and  it  was  not  long  before  he 
was  put  to  death, — A.  D.  324, —  in  violation  of  the  solemn 
oath  of  Constantine.  The  fact  that  Licinius  was  past  seventy 
years  of  age  at  the  time,  lent  to  the  transaction,  in  addition 
to  its  character  of  deliberate  perjury,  the  element  of  positive 
cruelty. 

The  next  year,  A.  D.  325,  Constantine  convened  at  Nice 
the  first  general  council  of  the  Catholic  Church,  presided 
over  its  deliberations,  and  enforced  its  decrees.  As  he 
entered  to  take  his  seat  as  president  of  the  council,  he  is 
thus  described :  — 

"  There  was  a  brightness  in  his  look  and  a  mingled  expression  of 
fierceness  and  gentleness  in  his  lion-like  eye,  which  well  became  one 
who,  as  Augustus  before  him,  had  fancied,  and  perhaps  still  fancied, 
himself  to  be  the  favorite  of  the  sun-god  Apollo."  —  Stanley.16 

By  this  time  he  had  progressed  so-  far  in  his  profession 
of  the  Catholic  religion  that  he  counted  himself  a  bishop, 
or  rather,  a  bishop  of  bishops,  though  he  had  never  yet  been 
received  even  into  the  order  of  Catechumens,  much  less  had 
he  been  initiated  into  full  membership  in  the  church. 

The  following  year  —  A.  D.  326  —  Constantine  went  to 
Rome  to  celebrate  in  that  city  the  twentieth  year  of  his 
accession  to  the  office  of  emperor,  and  while  there,  in  the 

16  /d.,  Lecture  iv,  par.  4. 


MANY  TIMES  A  MURDERER.  253 

month  of  April,  and  wholly  in  jealous  tyranny,  he  had  his 
son  Crispus  murdered.  Crispus  was  his  eldest  son,  who  had 
assisted  in  his  wars,  especially  with  Licinius,  and  had  proved 
himself  an  able  commander.  He  commanded  the  fleet  at 
the  siege  of  Byzantium,  and  after  the  battle  the  .names  of 
Constantine  and  Crispus  were  united  in  the  joyful  acclama- 
tions of  their  Eastern  subjects.  This  excited  the  jealousy  of 
Constantine,  who  soon  began  to  slight  Crispus,  and  bestow 
imperial  favors  upon  his  younger  son,  Constantius,  who  was 
but  a  mere  boy.  Constantine  pretended  that  Crispus  had 
entered  into  a  conspiracy  against  him,  and  October  21,  325, 
he  issued  an  edict  restoring  the  order  of  delators,  after  the 
manner  of  Tiberius  and  Domitian.  "By  all  the  allure- 
ments of  honors  and  rewards,  he  invites  informers  of  every 
degree  to  accuse  without  exception  his  magistrates  or  minis- 
ters, his  friends  or  his  most  intimate  favorites,  protesting, 
with  a  solemn  asseveration,  that  he  himself  will  listen  to  the 
charge."  -  Gibbon.11 

The  informers  were  not  long  in  finding  accusations 
against  Crispus  and  a  large  number  of  his  friends,  and 
"in  the  midst  of  the  festival,  the  unfortunate  Crispus  was 
apprehended  by  order  of  the  emperor,  who  laid  aside  the 
tenderness  of  a  father,  without  assuming  the  equity  of  a 
judge.  .  .  .  He  was  sent  under  a  strong  guard  to  Pola,  in 
Istria,  where,  soon  afterwards,  he  was  put  to  death,  either 
by  the  hand  of  the  executioner,  or  by  the  more  gentle  opera- 
tion of  poison.  The  Caesar  Licinius,  a  youth  of  amiable 
manners,  was  involved  in  the  ruin  of  Crispus  :  and  the  stern 
jealousy  of  Constantine  was  unmoved  by  the  prayers  and 
tears  of  his  favorite  sister,  pleading  for  the  life  of  a  son, 
whose  rank  was  his  only  crime,  and  whose  loss  she  did  not 
long  survive." —  Gibbon.1* 

Nor  were  these  the  only  ones  involved  in  the  execution. 
"The  sword  of  justice  or  of  cruelty,  once  let  loose,  raged 
against  those  who  were  suspected  as  partisans  of  the  danger- 

17 "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xviii,  par.  6.  I82d.,  par.  7. 


254  THE  RELIGION  OF  CON8TANTINE. 

ous  Crispus,  or  as  implicated  in  the  wide-spread  conspiracy, 
till  the  bold  satire  of  an  eminent  officer  of  state  did  not  scru- 
ple, in  some  lines  privately  circulated,  to  compare  the  splen- 
did but  bloody  times  with  those  of  Nero."  —  Jfilman.19 

Nor  yet  did  he  stop  here.  "This  was  only  the  first  act 
of  the  domestic  tragedy :  the  death  of  the  emperor's  wife 
Fausta,  the  partner  of  twenty  years  of  wedlock,  the  mother 
of  his  three  surviving  sons,  increased  the  general  horror. 
She  was  suffocated  in  a  bath  which  had  been  heated  to  an 
insupportable  degree  of  temperature."  "  The  tragedy  which 
took  place  in  the  family  of  Constantine  betrayed  to  the  sur- 
prised and  anxious  world  that,  if  his  outward  demeanor 
showed  respect  or  veneration  for  Christianity,  its  milder 
doctrines  had  made  little  impression  on  the  unsoftened  pagan- 
ism of  his  heart." — Milman.™ 

Shortly  after  this,  Constantine's  mother  went  to  Jerusalem 
on  a  pilgrimage  to  recover  the  holy  places,  and  to  build 
churches  upon  them.  She  carried  a  letter  from  Constan- 
tine to  Macarius,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  he  stated 
that  it  was  always  his  "first  and  only  object  to  excite  all 
minds  to  the  observation  of  the  holy  law  with  alacrity  and 
diligence  proportioned  to  the  brightness  of  the  manifestation 
which  is  thrown  by  new  miracles  upon  the  truth  of  the  faith, 
day  by  day  :  "  and  that  it  was  his  "  most  intense  desire  to 
erect  beautiful  edifices  "  upon  that  spot  which  had  been  con- 
secrated ' '  by  the  sufferings  of  our  Lord,  who  thus  brought 
faith  to  light."21 

Helena  was  said  to  be  about  eighty  years  old  at  this  time, 
and  the  tale  was  invented,  and  one  hundred  years  later  be- 
came a  matter  of  history,  that  she  discovered  the  tomb  in 
which  the  Saviour  had  been  buried  ;  that  in  it  were  found  all 
three  of  the  crosses  that  were  used  on  the  day  of  the  cruci- 
fixion, the  nails  that  were  used  in  the  crucifixion  of  the 

19  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ii,  par.  12. 

20  Id.,  par.  13,  10. 

21  Theodoret's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap,  xvii. 


H 

B 

o 


B 

§ 

P 

ffi 


THE   TRUE  CROSS  AND   CONSTANTINE.  355 

Saviour,  and  the  tablet  which  Pilate  had  caused  to  be  put  upon 
the  cross  of  the  Saviour.  But  nobody  could  tell  which  was 
the  true  cross.  Yet  says  the  fable  :  — 

"From  this  trouble  she  was  shortly  relieved  by  Macarius,  bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  whose  faith  solved  the  doubt,  for  he  sought  a  sign  from  God 
and  obtained  it.  The  sign  was  this  :  A  certain  woman  of  the  neighbor- 
hood, who  had  been  long  afflicted  with  disease,  was  now  just  at  the  point 
of  death.  The  bishop  therefore  ordered  that  each  of  the  crosses  should 
be  applied  to  the  dying  woman,  believing  that  she  would  be  healed  upon 
being  touched  by  the  precious  cross.  Nor  was  he  disappointed  in  his  ex- 
pectation :  for  the  two  crosses  having  been  applied  which  were  not  the 
Lord's,  the  woman  still  continued  in  a  dying  state  ;  but  when  the  third, 
which  was  the  true  cross,  touched  her,  she  was  immediately  healed,  and 
recovered  her  former  strength.  In  this  manner  then  was  the  genuine 
cross  discovered.  The  emperor's  mother  erected  over  the  place  of  the 
sepulcher  a  magnificent  church,  and  named  it  New  Jerusalem,  having 
built  it  opposite  to  that  old  and  deserted  city.  There  she  left  a  portion  of 
the  cross,  inclosed  in  a  silver  case,  as  a  memorial  to  those  who  might 
wish  to  see  it.  The  other  part  she  sent  to  the  emperor,  who,  being  per- 
suaded that  the  city  would  be  perfectly  secure  where  that  relic  should  be 
preserved,  privately  inclosed  it  in  his  own  statue,  which  stands  on  a  large 
column  of  porphyry  in  the  forum  called  Constantine's  at  Constantinople. 
/  have  written  this  from  report  indeed ;  but  almost  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Constantinople  affirm  that  it  is  true.  Moreover,  Constantino  caused  the 
nails  with  which  Christ's  hands  were  fastened  to  the  cross  (for  his  mother 
having  found  these  also  in  the  sepulcher  had  sent  them)  to  be  converted 
into  bridle  bits  and  a  helmet,  which  he  used  in  his  military  expeditions." 
—  Socrates.22 

From  this  it  would  seem  that  by  this  time  he  would 
be  ready  to  stand  by  the  profession  of  Christianity  alone,  but 
such  was  not  the  case  ;  for  in  A.  D.  328,  when  he  traced  the 
limits  and  laid  the  foundation  of  his  projected  new  city  of 
Constantinople,  he  held  the  same  ambiguous  course  as  form- 
erly, and  accordingly  ' '  issued  an  imperial  edict  announcing 
to  the  world  that  Constantino  by  the  command  of  God  had 
founded  the  eternal  city."  "But  however  the  Deity  might 
have  intimated  his  injunctions  to  commence  the  work,  or 
whatever  the  nature  of  the  invisible  guide  which,  as  he  de- 

22  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap.  xvii. 


256  THE  RELIGION  OF  CONSTANTINE. 

clared,  thus  directed  his  steps,  this  vague  appeal  to  the 
Deity  would  impress  with  the  same  respect  all  his  subjects, 
and  by  its  impartial  ambiguity  offend  none.  In  earlier 
times  the  pagans  would  have  bowed  down  in  homage  before 
this  manifestation  of  the  nameless  tutelar  deity  of  the  new 
city  ;  at  the  present  period,  they  had  become  familiarized, 
as  it  were,  with  the  concentration  of  Olympus  into  one 
Supreme  Being.  The  Christians  would,  of  course,  assert 
the  exclusive  right  of  the  one  true  God  to  this  appellation, 
and  attribute  to  his  inspiration  and  guidance  every  important 
act  of  the  Christian  emperor."  —Milman.™ 

Yet  a  little  later  his  actions  seemed  to  indicate  that  he  had 
reverted  to  paganism  alone  ;  for  when  in  A.  D.  330  the  act- 
ual work  of  building  the  city  was  inaugurated,  the  "ancient 
ritual  of  Roman  paganism  contained  a  solemn  ceremony, 
which  dedicated  a  new  city  to  the  protection  of  the  Deity  " 
(Milmanzi)  :  and  Sopater,  a  Neoplatonic  heathen,  "assisted 
with  his  heathen  ceremonies  at  the  consecration." —  /Stanley.25 

However,  in  building  the  city  he  fully  acquitted  him- 
self in  the  estimation  of  both  pagans  and  Catholics.  For 
while  he  erected  magnificent  edifices  for  the  Catholic 
Church,  he  also  set  up  the  images  of  the  pagan  deities  "in 
all  the  public  places  of  Constantinople.  If  the  inhabitants 
were  not  encouraged,  at  least  they  were  not  forbidden,  to 
pay  divine  honors  to  the  immortal  sculptures  of  Phidias  and 
Praxiteles,  which  were  brought  from  all  quarters  to  adorn 
the  squares  and  baths  of  Byzantium.  The  whole  Roman 
world  contributed  to  the  splendor  of  Constantinople.  The 
tutelar  deities  of  all  the  cities  of  Greece  (their  influence,  of 
course,  much  enfeebled  by  their  removal  from  their  local 
sanctuaries)  were  assembled, —  the  Minerva  of  Lyndus,  the 
Cybele  of  Mount  Dindymus  (which  was  said  to  have  been 
placed  there  by  the  Argonauts),  the  muses  of  Helicon,  the 

23  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  5.          2*/d,  par.  4. 
25 "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  42. 


IS   THIS  PAGANISM  OR   CHRISTIANITY f  257 

Amphitrite  of  Khodes,  t»he  Pan  consecrated  by  united  Greece 
after  the  defeat  of  the  Persians,  the  Delphic  Tripod.  The 
Dioscuri  [Castor  and  Pollux]  overlooked  the  Hippodrome." — 
Milman.26 

When  in  334  the  city  was  finished,  and  he  would  cele- 
brate its  completion,  "the  ceremonial  of  the  dedication  was 
attended  by  still  more  dubious  circumstances.  After  a  most 
splendid  exhibition  of  chariot  games  in  the  Hippodrome,1  the 
emperor  moved  in  a  magnificent  car  through  the  most  public 
part  of  the  city,  encircled  by  all  his  guards  in  the  attire  of  a 
religious  ceremonial,  and  bearing  torches  in  their  hands. 
The  emperor  himself  held  a  golden  statue  of  the  Fortune  of 
the  city  in  his  hands.  An  imperial  edict  enacted  the  annual 
celebration  of  this  rite.  On  the  birthday  of  the  city,  the 
gilded  statue  of  himself,  thus  bearing  the  same  golden  image 
of  Fortune,  was  annually  to  be  led  through  the  Hippodrome 
to  the  foot  of  the  imperial  throne,  and  to  receive  the  ado- 
ration of  the  reigning  emperor."  —  MUmcm.™ 

Yet  it  seems  as  though  he  considered  this  not  enough. 
When  he  had  besieged  Licinius  at  this  place,  he  had  pitched 
his  tent  on  a  certain  hill.  In  the  building  of  the  city  he 
chose  that  spot  for  the  principal  forum  at  one  end  of  which 
was  a  statue  of  Cybele,  and  at  the  other  the  goddess  of 
Fortune,  the  patroness  of  the  new  city.  In  the  center  of  the 
forum  he  planted  a  column,  the  pedestal  of  which  was  of 
white  marble  twenty  feet  high.  Upon  this  were  set,  one 
upon  another,  ten  pieces  of  "porphyry,  each  of  which  meas- 
ured about  ten  feet  in  height  and  about  thirty-three  in  cir- 
cumference," making  the  pillar  in  all  about  one  hundred  and 
twenty  feet  in  height.  On  the  top  of  this  pillar,  Constantine 
placed  a  colossaj  bronze  statue  of  Apollo,  with  the  figure  of 
his  own  head  upon  it,  and  round  about  the  crown  like  the 
rays  of  the  sun  were  the  nails  of  "the  true  cross,"  which  his 
mother  had  sent  to  him  from  Jerusalem.  The  full  account 

26  "  History  of  Christianity,"  par.  6.  27  Id.,  par.  7. 


258  THE  RELIGION  OF  CONSTANTINO. 

of  this  is  well  given  by  another,  and  is  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance in  this  connection  to  be  quoted  in  full :  — 

"  The  lingering  attachment  of  Constantino  to  the  favorite  supersti- 
tion of  his  earlier  days  may  be  traced  on  still  better  authority.  The 
Grecian  worship  of  Apollo  had  been  exalted  into  the  oriental  veneration 
of  the  sun,  as  the  visible  representative  of  the  Deity  ;  and  of  all  the 
statues  that  were  introduced  from  different  quarters,  none  were  received 
with  greater  honor  than  those  of  Apollo.  In  one  part  of  the  city  stood 
the  Pythian,  in  another  the  Sminthian  deity.  The  Delphic  Tripod, 
which,  according  to  Zosimus,  contained  an  image  of  the  god,  stood  upon 
the  column  of  three  twisted  serpents,  supposed  to  represent  the  mystic 
Python.  But  on  a  still  loftier,  the  famous  pillar  of  porphyry,  stood  an 
image  in  which,  if  we  are  to  credit  modern  authority  (and  the  more 
modern  our  authority,  the  less  likely  is  it  to  have  invented  so  singular  a 
statement),  Constantino  dared  to  mingle  together  the  attributes  of  the 
sun,  of  Christ,  and  of  himself.  According  to  one  tradition,  this  pillar 
was  based,  as  it  were,  on  another  superstition.  The  venerable  Palladium 
itself,  surreptitiously  conveyed  from  Rome,  was  buried  beneath  it,  and 
thus  transferred  the  eternal  destiny  of  the  old  to  the  new  capital.  The 
pillar,  formed  of  marble  and  of  porphyry,  rose  to  the  height  of  a  hundred 
and  twenty  feet.  The  colossal  image  on  the  top  was  that  of  Apollo, 
either  from  Phrygia  or  from  Athens.  But  the  head  of  Constantino  had 
been  substituted  for  that  of  the  god.  The  scepter  proclaimed  the 
dominion  of  the  world  ;  and  it  held  in  its  hand  the  globe,  emblematic 
of  universal  empire.  Around  the  head,  instead  of  rays,  were  fixed  the 
nails  of  the  true  cross.  Is  tJiis  paganism  approximating  to  Christianity, 
or  Christianity  degenerating  into  paganism  ?  " —  Milman.ZK 

We  are  satisfied  that  the  reader  will  have  no  difficulty  in 
answering  the  question  which  is  here  propounded.  "It  is 
no  more  certain  that  he  despised  and  pitied  paganism  while 
he  was  solemnly  offering  sacrifices  to  Jupiter,  and  winning 
the  admiration  and  love  of  the  Roman  world  for  his  impe- 
rial piety,  than  it  is  certain  that  he  pitied  and  despised  the 
church  of  Christ,  even  while  he  was  manipulating  the  faith 
into  a  sure  and  reliable  support  of  the  empire  ;  in  both 
courses  he  only  played  with  the  world,  giving  men  any  re- 
ligious toy  which  the  greater  part  might  prefer  to  have,  in 

28  Id.,  par.  7. 


A   MURDERER  EVEN  IN  DEATH.  259 

exchange  for  the  liberty  of  which  he  robbed  them  so  plausi- 
bly and  successfully  that  they  scarcely  perceived  his  theft, 
and  enthusiastically  caressed  the  royal  thief.-' — Author  of 
"Arius  tlie  Libyan."  It  was  the  same  mixture  of  pagan  and 
apostate  Christian  wickedness,  the  origin  and  progress  of 
which  we  have  seen  in  the  chapter  on  "The  Falling  Away." 

Nor  is  the  record  yet  complete.  In  A.  D.  335,  in  the 
further  exercise  of  his  office  of  bishop  of  bishops  in  the 
church,  Constantine  convened  the  Synod  of.  Tyre  to  examine 
further  into  some  questions  that  were  raised  in  the  trini- 
tarian  controversy.  Yet  all  this  time"  he  was  still  keeping 
about  him  that  Sopater  who  had  assisted  with  the  heathen 
ceremonials  at  the  foundation  of  Constantinople.  Sopater 
was  so  openly  favored  by  Constantine  that  the  church  party 
grew  jealous  and  quite  alarmed  for  fear  they  should  lose 
their  emperor  altogether.29 

In  A.  D.  337  Constantine  was  taken  with  a  serious  illness, 
and  being  satisfied  that  he  was  about  to  die,  he  called  for  an 
Arian  bishop,  and  was  baptized.  Then  "  he  was  clothed  in 
robes  of  dazzling  whiteness  ;  his  couch  was  covered  with 
white  also  :  in  the  white  robes  of  baptism,  on  a  white  death- 
bed, he  lay,  in  expectation  of  his  end.  .  .  .  At  noon  on 
Whit-Sunday,  the  22nd  of  May,  in  the  sixty-fourth  year  of 
his  age,  and  the  thirty-first  of  his  reign,  he  expired.  .  .  . 
So  passed  away  the  first  Christian  emperor,  the  first  defender 
of  the  faith  —  the  first  imperial  patron  of  the  papal  see,  and 
of  the  whole  Eastern  church, —  the  first  founder  of  tlie  holy 

places, PAGAN    AND    CHRISTIAN,    ORTHODOX      AND     HERETICAL, 

LIBERAL  AND  FANATICAL,  not  to  he  imitated  or  admired,  hut 
much  to  he  remembered,  and  deeply  to  he  studied."  —  Stanley.™ 
His  body  was  inclosed  in  a  coffin  of  gold  and  taken  in 
solemn  procession  to  Constantinople,  where  it  la^in  state  for 
three  months,  waiting  for  his  two  eldest  sons  to  arrive,  the 
youngest  cfnly  being  present. 

29 Id.,  chap,  iv,  par.  39.       30  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  end  of  Lecture  vi. 


260  THE  RELIGION  OF  CON8TANTINE. 

And  yet  the  record  is  not  complete.  When  he  was 
attacked  by  his  last  illness  he  suspected  poison,  and  be- 
fore he  died  he  gave  to  the  bishop  of  Nicomedia  his 
will  to  be  handed  to  his  eldest  son  when  he  should  arrive 
at  Constantinople.  The  bishop  having  read  it  and  found 
its  terrible  import,  put  it  in  the  dead  emperor's  hand,  and 
left  it  there  until  Constantius  took  it.  The  purport  of  the 
instruction  was  that  he  believed  he  had  been  poisoned  by 
his  brothers  and  their  children,  and  instructed  his  sons 
to  avenge  his  death.  "That  bequest  was  obeyed  by  the 
massacre  of  six  out  of  the  surviving  princes  of  the  imperial 
family.  Two  alone  escaped."  —  Stanley.*1 

As  neither  Christians  nor  pagans  could  tell  to  which 
religion  Constantine  belonged  while  he  was  alive,  and  con- 
sequently both  claimed  him,  so  likewise  both  claimed  him 
after  he  was  dead  :  — 

"  Even  after  his  death  both  religions  vied,  as  it  were,  for  Constantine. 
He  received  with  impartial  favor  the  honors  of  both.  The  first  Christian 
emperor  was  deified  by  the  pagans  ;  in  a  latter  period  he  was  worshiped 
as  a  saint  by  part  of  the  Christian  church.  On  the  same  medal  appears 
his  title  of  'god,'  with  the  monogram,  the  sacred  symbol  of  Christianity  ; 
in  another  he  is  seated  in  the  chariot  of  the  sun,  in  a  car  drawn  by  four 
horses,  with  a  hand  stretched  forth  from  the  clouds  to  raise  him  to 
heaven."  —  Milman.32 

Even  to  this  time  and  to  this  extent  Constantine  himself 
was  to  blame  for  his  ambiguous  position,  as  he  had  been  all 
the  time  he  had  lived  as  emperor.  He  himself  had  erected 
a  grand  church  in  Constantinople  called  the  Church  of  the 
Apostles,  which  he  intended  to  be  his  burial  place.  Further 
particulars  are  as  follows  :  — 

"He  had  in  fact  made  choice  of  this  spot  in  the  prospect  of  his  own 
death,  anticipating  with  extraordinary  fervor  of  faith  that  his  body  would 
share  their  tr^e  with  the  apostles  themselves,  and  that  he  should  thus 
even  after  death  become  the  subject,  with  them,  of  the  devotions  which 

31  Id.,  Lecture  vi,  par.  7  from  the  end. 

3a  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  3  from  the  end. 


LITTLE  BETTER   THAN  A  PAGAN.  261 

would  be  performed  to  their  honor  in  this  place.  He  accordingly  caused 
twelve  coffins  to  be  set  up  in  this  church,  like  sacred  pillars  in  honor  and 
memory  of  the  apostolic  number,  in  the  center  of  which  his  own  was 
placed,  having  six  of  theirs  on  either  side  of  it." — Eusebius.33 

And  as  had  been  his  practice  all  the  way  along,  he  called 
this  church  by  a  name  "  truly  indicating  the  mixture  of  pagan 
and  Christian  ideas  which  led  to  its  erection,  the  '  HerodnS ' 
—  Stanley.™     The  word  "  Heroon  "  denotes  the   temple  or 
chapel  of  a  hero. 

We  have  now  given  the  facts  simply  as  we  have  found 
them,  in  regard  to  Constantine's  religious  life.  We  think 
no  one  can  have  the  slightest  difficulty  in  deciding  that  he 
never  was  a  Christian  in  any  proper  sense  of  the  word.  We 
think  all  must  agree  "that  his  progress  in  the  knowledge  of 
Christianity  was  not  a  progress  in  the  practice  of  its  virtues  ;  " 
that  "his  love  of  display  and  his  prodigality,  his  suspicious- 
ness  and  his  despotism,  increased  with  his  power  ;  and  that 
the  very  brightest  period  of  his  reign  is  stained  with  gross 
crimes,  which  even  the  spirit  of  the  age  and  the  policy  of  an 
absolute  monarch  cannot  excuse."  —  SeJiaff™ 

All  of  this  is  confirmed  by  another  in  recording  the  "  fact 
that  he  was  by  general  consent,  a  worse  prince  at  the  close 
of  his  reign  than  at  its  beginning,  when  he  was  little  better 
than  a  pagan."  —  Stanley.™ 

The  synopsis  of  the  whole  question  as  to  what  was  the 
religion  of  Constantine,  can  be  no  better  expressed  than  it 
has  already  been  by  another  in  the  following  words  :  — 

"Constantine  adopted  Christianity  first  as  a  superstition,  and  put  it 
by  the  side  of  his  heathen  superstition,  till  finally  in  his  conviction  the 
Christian  vanquished  the  pagan,  though  without  itself  developing  into  a 
pure  and  enlightened  faith."  —  Schaf.*1 

33  "Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iv,  chap.  vi. 

34  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  5  from  the  end. 

35  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  g  2,  par.  10,  11. 
36 "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  26. 

37  "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  2,  par.  6. 


262 


THE  RELIGION  OF  CON8TANTINE. 


And  the  final  analysis,  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter, 
the  sum  of  all  that  has  been  or  that  can  be  said  is,  that  in 
Constantino  the  elements  of  the  actual  pagan  and  the  apostate 
Christian  were  so  perfectly  mixed  as  to  produce  THE  TYPICAL 

PAPIST  OF  ALL  TIMES. 


HOME   DEIFIED. 


CONSTANTINK. 


CHAPTER  XI. 


CONSTANTINE   AND   THE   BISHOPS. 

"T^ROM  the  reading  of  Chapter  VI,  it  will  be  remembered 
L  that  Diocletian  had  no  sooner  abdicated  than  the  system 
of  orderly  government  which  he  had  established  and  which 
he  hoped  would  continue,  fell  to  pieces,  and  confusion  once 
more  ruled  in  the  affairs  of  state.  So  far  as  the  government 
was  concerned,  the  army  was  now,  as  it  had  been  for  hun- 
dreds of  years,  the  source  of  power  ;*  but  among  the  four' 
aspiring  emperors  not  only  the  military  force,  but  the  terri- 
tory of  the  empire,  was  almost  equally  divided.  So  nearly 
equal  was  this  division  that  not  one  of  the  emperors  had  any 
material  advantage  over  another  in  this  respect.  Yet  it  was 
the  ambition  of  each  one  to  become  sole  emperor.  It  there- 
fore became  a  matter  of  vital  concern  to  each  one  to  obtain 
whatever  power  he  might,  and  yet  there  was  no  further  re- 
source to  be  hoped  for  from  the  side  of  the  empire.  Thus 
stood  matters  among  the  emperors. 

How  was  it  with  the  church  ?  We  insert  again  the  quo- 
tation made  from  Eusebius  concerning  the  state  of  things  in 
the  churches  before  the  persecution  by  Diocletian  :  — 

"  When  by  reason  of  excessive  liberty,  we  sunk  into  negligence  and 
sloth,  one  envying  and  reviling  another  in  different  ways,  and  we  were 
almost,  as  it  were,  on  the  point  of  taking  up  arms  against  each  other,  and 
were  assailing  each  other  with  words  as  with  darts  and  spears,  prelates 
inveighing  against  prelates,  and  people  rising  up  against  people,  and 
hypocrisy  and  dissimulation  had  arisen  to  the  greatest  height  of  malig- 
nity, then  the  divine  judgment,  which  usually  proceeds  with  a  lenient 
hand,  whilst  the  multitudes  were  yet  crowding  into  the  church,  with 

[  263] 
23 


264:  CONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

gentle  and  mild  visitations  began  to  afflict  its  episcopacy  ;  the  persecution 
having  begun  with  those  brethren  that  were  in  the  army.  But,  as  if  des- 
titute of  all  sensibility,  we  were  not  prompt  in  measures  to  appease  and 
propitiate  the  Deity  ;  some,  indeed,  like  atheists,  regarding  our  situation 
as  unheeded  and  unobserved  by  a  providence,  we  added  one  wickedness 
and  misery  to  another.  But  some  that  appeared  to  be  our  pastors,  desert- 
ing the  law  of  piety,  were  inflamed  against  each  other  with  mutual 
strifes,  only  accumulating  quarrels  and  threats,  rivalship,  hostility,  and 
hatred  to  each  other,  only  anxious  to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind  of 
sovereignty  for  themselves." 

The  persecution  had  caused  all  these  divisions  and  dis- 
putes to  be  laid  aside.  Every  other  interest  was  forgotten  in 
the  one  all-absorbing  question  of  the  rights  of  conscience 
against  pagan  despotism.  Thus  there  was  created  at  least  an 
outward  unity  among  all  the  sects  of  whatever  name,  profess- 
ing the  Christian  religion  in  any  form.  Thus  was  molded  a 
compact  power  which  permeated  every  part  of  the  empire, 
and  which  was  at  the  same  time  estranged  from  every 
material  interest  of  the  empire  as  it  then  stood.  Here  was 
power  which  if  it  could  be  secured  and  used,  would  assure 
success  to  him  who  would  gain  it,  as  certainly  as  he  could 
make  the  alliance.  This  condition  of  affairs  was  clearly  dis- 
cerned at  the  time.  Constantine  ; '  understood  the  signs  of 
the  times  and  acted  accordingly." 

uTo  Constantine,  who  had  fled  from  the  treacherous 
custody  of  Galerius,  it  naturally  occurred  that  if  he  should 
ally  himself  to  the  Christian  party,  conspicuous  advantages 
must  forthwith  accrue  to  him.  It  would  give  him  in  every 
corner  of  the  empire  men  and  women  ready  to  encounter 
fire  and  sword  ;  it  would  give  him  partisans  not  only  ani- 
mated by  the  traditions  of  their  fathers,  but  —  for  human 
nature  will  even  in  the  religious  assert  itself  —  demanding 
retribution  for  the  horrible  barbarities  and  injustice  that  had 
been  inflicted  on  themselves  ;  it  would  give  him,  and  this 
was  the  most  important  of  all,  unwavering  adherents  in  every 
legion  in  the  army.  He  took  his.  course.  The  events  of 
war  crowned  him  with  success.  He  could  not  be  otherwise 


THE  NEW  THEOCRAGJ.  265 

than  outwardly  true  to  those  who  had  given  him  power,  and 
who  continued  to  maintain  him  on  the  throne." — Draper.1 

Constantine  was  not  the  only  one  who  saw  this  oppor- 
tunity. Maximin  likewise  detected  it,  but  was  distrusted  by 
the  church  party.  Constantine  being  a  much  more  accom- 
plished politician,  succeeded.'  In  addition  to  the  advantages 
which  offered  themselves  in  this  asserted  unity  of  the 
churches,  there  was  a  movement  among  the  bishops,  which 
made  it  an  additional  incentive  to  Constctntine  to  form  the 
alliance  which  he  did  with  the  church.  Although  it  is  true 
that  all  the  differences  and  disputes  and  strifes  among  the 
bishops  and  sects  had  been  forgotten  in  the  supreme  conflict 
between  paganism  and  freedom  of  thought,  there  is  one 
thing  mentioned  by  Eusebius  that  still  remained.  That  was 
the  ambition  of  the  bishops  "to  assert  the  government  as  a 
kind  of  sovereignty  for  themselves."  Nor  was  it  alone 
government  in  the  church  which  they  were  anxious  to  assert ; 
but  government  in  the  State  as  well,  to  l)e  used  in  the  interests 
of  the  church.  For,  "There  had  in  fact  arisen  in  the 
church  .  .  ".  a  false  theocratical  theory,  originating,  not 
in  the  essence  of  the  gospel,  but  in  the  confusion  of  the 
religious  constitutions  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments." — 
Neander* 

This  theocratical  theory  of  the  bishops  is  the  key  to  the 
whole  history  of  Constantine  and  the  church  of  his  time,  and 
through  all  the  dreary  period  that  followed.  It  led  the 
bishops  into  the  wildest  extravagance  in  their  worship  of  the 
imperial  influence,  and  coincided  precisely  with  Constantine's 
idea  of  an  absolute  monarchy. 

The  idea  of  the  theocracy  that  the  bishops  hoped  to 
establish  appears  more  clearly  and  fully  in  Eusebius's  "Life 
of  Constantine  "  than  in  any  other  one  production  of  the 
time.  There  the  whole  scheme  appears  just  as  they  had 

1 "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  chap,  ix,  par.  22. 
2  "  History  of  the  Christian   Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  11,  Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  2. 


266  CONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

created  it,  and  as  it  was  applied  in  the  history  of  the  time. 
The  church  was  a  second  Israel  in  Egyptian  bondage. 
Maxentius  was  a  second  Pharaoh,  Constantine  was  a  second 
Moses.  As  the  original  Moses  had  grown  up  in  the  palace 
of  the  Pharaohs,  so  likewise  £his  new  Moses  had  grown  up 
in  the  very  society  of  the  new  Pharaohs.  Thus  runs  the 
story  : — 

"Ancient  history  relates  that  a  cruel  race  of  tyrants  oppressed  the 
Hebrew  nation  ;  and  the  God  who  graciously  regarded  them  in  their 
affliction,  provided  that  the  prophet  Moses,  who  was  then  an  infant, 
should  be  brought  up  in  the  very  palaces  and  bosoms  of  the  oppressors, 
and  instructed  in  all  the  wisdom  they  possessed.  And  when  he  had 
arrived  at  the  age  of  manhood,  and  the  time  was  come  for  divine  jus- 
tice to  avenge  the  wrongs  of  the  afflicted  people,  then  the  prophet  of 
God,  in  obedience  to  the  will  of  a  more  powerful  Lord,  forsook  the  royal 
household,  and,  estranging  himself  in  word  and  deed  from  those  by  whom 
he  had  been  brought  up,  openly  preferred  the  society  of  his  true  brethren 
and  kinsfolk.  And  in  due  time  God  exalted  him  to  be  the  leader  of  the 
whole  nation  ;  and,  after  delivering  the  Hebrews  from  the  bondage  of 
their  enemies,  inflicted  divine  vengeance  through  his  means  upon  the 
tyrant  race.  This  ancient  story,  though  regarded  by  too  many  as  fabu- 
lous, has  reached  the  ears  of  all.  But  now  the  same  God  has  given  to 
us  to  be  eye-witnesses  of  miracles  more  wonderful  than  fables,  and,  from 
their  recent  appearance,  more  authentic  than  any  report.  For  the  tyrants 
of  our  day  have  ventured  to  war  against  the  supreme  God,  and  have 
sorely  afflicted  his  church.  And  in  the  midst  of  these,  Constantine,  who 
was  shortly  to  become  their  destroyer,  but  at  that  time  of  tender  age, 
and  blooming  with  the  down  of  early  youth,  dwelt,  as  God's  servant 
Moses  had  done,  in  the  very  home  of  the  tyrants.  Young,  however,  as 
he  was,  he  shared  not  in  the  pursuits  of  the  impious  :  for  from  that  early 
period  his  noble  nature  (under  the  leading  of  the  Divine  Spirit),  inclined 
him  to  a  life  of  piety  and  acceptable  service  to  God."  —  Eusebius.3 

We  have  related  how  Galerius  sought  to  prevent  Con- 
stantine's  joining  his  father  in  Britain ;  and  how  Con- 
stantine succeeded  in  eluding  his  vigilance.  By  the  theo- 
cratical  bishops  this  was  made  to  be  the  flight  of  the  new 
Moses  from  the  wrath  of  the  new  Pharaohs.  Thus  the  story 
continues  :  — 

8  "  Life  of  Constantino,"  book  i,  chap.  xii. 


THE  NEW  ISRAEL  DELIVERED.  267 

"The  emperors  then  in  power,  who  observed  his  manly  and  vigorous 
figure  and  superior  mind  with  feelings  of  jealousy  and  fear,  .  .  .  care- 
fully watched  for  an  opportunity  of  inflicting  some  brand  of  disgrace  on 
his  character.  But  he,  being  aware  of  their  designs  (the  details  of  which, 
through  the  providence  of  God,  were  more  than  once  laid  open  to  his 
view),  sought  safety  in  flight,  and  in  this  respect  his  conduct  still  affords 
a  parallel  to  that  of  the  great  prophet  Moses."  —  Eusebius.* 

As  the  original  Moses,  without  the  interposition  of  any 
human  agency,  had  been  called  to  the  work  to  which  the 
Lord  had  appointed  him,  so  the  theocratical  bishops  had 
the  new  Moses  likewise  appointed  directly  by  the  authority 
of  God  :  - 

"Thus,  then,  the  God  of  all,  the  supreme  Governor  of  the  world,  by 
his  own  will,  appointed  Constantino,  the  descendant  of  so  renowned  a 
parent,  to  be  prince  and  sovereign  :  so  that,  while  others  have  been 
raised  to  this  distinction  by  the  election  of  their  fellow-men,  he  is  the 
only  one  to  whose  elevation  no  mortal  may  boast  of  having  contributed." 
—  Eusebius. 5 

Eusebius  knew  as  well  as  any  other  man  in  the  empire 
that  the  legions  in  Britain  had  proclaimed  Constantine  em- 
peror, precisely  as  the  armies  had  been  doing  in  like  in- 
stances for  more  than  a  hundred  years.  .He  knew  full  well 
that  Constantine  held  his  title  to  the  imperial  power  by  the 
same  tenure  precisely  as  had  all  the  emperors  Defore  him 
from  the  accession  of  Claudius.  In  short,  when  the  bishop 
Eusebius  wrote  this  statement,  he  knew  that  he  was  writing 
a  downright  lie. 

When  Constantine  marched  against  Maxentius,  it  was  the 
new  Moses  on  his  way  to  deliver  Israel.  When  the  army  of 
Maxentius  was  defeated  and  multitudes  were  drowned  in  the 
river,  it  was  the  Red  Sea  swallowing  up  the  hosts  of  Pharaoh. 
When  Maxentius  was  crowded  off  the  bridge  and  by  the 
weight  of  his  armor  sank  instantly  to  the  bottom  of  the  river, 
it  was  the  new  Pharaoh  and  "the  horse  and  his  rider"  be- 
ing thrown  into  the  sea  and  sinking  to  the  bottom  like  a  stone. 

*/<#.,  chap.  xx.  5/d!.,  chap.  xxlv. 


268  CONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

Then  was  Israel  delivered,  and  a  song  of  deliverance  was 
sung  by  the  new  Israel  as  by  the  original  Israel  at  their  deliv- 
erance. Thus  the  story  continues  :  — 

"And  now  those  miracles  recorded  in  Holy  Writ,  which  God  of  old 
wrought  against  the  ungodly  (discredited  by  most  as  fables,  yet  believed  by 
the  faithful),  did  he  in  very  deed  confirm  to  all,  alike  believers  and  unbe- 
lievers, who  were  eye-witnesses  to  the  wonders  I  am  about  to  relate.  For 
as  once  in  the  days  of  Moses  and  the  Hebrew  nation,  who  were  worshipers 
of  God,  he  cast  Pharaoh's  chariots  and  his  host  into  the  waves,  and  drowned 
his  chosen  chariot-captains  in  the  Red  Sea, —  so  at  this  time  did  Maxentius, 
and  the  soldiers  and  guards  with  him,  sink  to  the  bottom  as  a  stone, 
when,  in  his  flight  before  the  divinely  aided  forces  of  Constantine,  he 
essayed  to  cross  the  river  which  lay  in  his  way,  over  which  he  had  made 
a  strong  bridge  of  boats,  and  had  framed  an  engine  of  destruction,  really 
against  himself,  but  in  the  hope  of  ensnaring  thereby  him  who  was  be- 
loved of  God.  For  his  God  stood  by  the  one  to  protect  him,  while  the 
other,  destitute  of  his  aid,  proved  to  be  the  miserable  contriver  of  these 
secret  devices  to  his  own  ruin.  So  that  one  might  well  say,  '  He  made  a 
pit,  and  digged  it,  and  shall  fall  into  the  ditch  which  he  made.  His  mis- 
chief shall  return  upon  his  own  head,  and  his  iniquity  shall  come  down 
upon  his  own  pate.'  Thus,  in  the  present  instance,  under  divine  direc- 
tion, the  machine  erected  on  the  bridge,  with  the  ambuscade  concealed 
therein,  giving  way  unexpectedly  before  the  appointed  time,  the  passage 
began  to  sink  down,  and  the  boats  with  the  men  in  them  went  bodily  to 
the  bottom.  At  first  the  wretch  himself,  then  his  armed  attendants  and 
guards,  even  as  the  sacred  oracles  had  before  described,  '  sank  as  lead  in 
the  mighty  waters.'  So  that  they  who  thus  obtained  victory  from  God 
might  well,  if  not  in  the  same  words,  yet  in  fact  in  the  same  spirit  as  the 
people  of  his  great  servant  Moses,  sing  and  speak  as  they  did  concerning 
the  impious  tyrant  of  old  :  '  Let  us  sing  unto  the  Lord,  for  he  has  been 
glorified  exceedingly  :  the  horse  and  his  rider  has  he  thrown  into  the 
sea.  He  is  become  my  helper  and  my  shield  unto  salvation.'  And  again, 
'  Who  is  like  to  thee,  O  Lord,  among  the  gods  ?  who  is  like  thee,  glori- 
ous in  holiness,  marvelous  in  praises,  doing  wonders  ?'" — fJusebius.6 

Such  adulation  was  not  without  response  on  the  part  of 
Constantine.  He  united  himself  closely  with  the  bishops,  of 
whom  Eusebius  was  but  one,  and,  in  his  turn,  flattered 
them  :  - 

6  Jrf.,  chap,  xxxvfii. 


FINAL    WAR    WITH  L1CINIUS.  269 

"  The  emperor  was  also  accustomed  personally  to  invite  the  society 
of  God's  ministers,  whom  he  distinguished  with  the  highest  possible  re- 
spect and  honor,  treating  them  in  every  sense  as  persons  consecrated  to 
the  service  of  God.  Accordingly,  they  were  admitted  to  his  table,  though 
mean  in  their  attire  and  outward  appearance  ;  yet  not  so  in  his  estima- 
tion, since  he  judged  not  of  their  exterior  as  seen  by  the  vulgar  eye,  but 
thought  he  discerned  in  them  somewhat  of  the  character  of  God  him- 
self." —  EusebiusJ1 

This  worked  charmingly.  Throughout  the  empire  the 
courtly  bishops  worked  in  Constantino's  interest  ;  and  as 
Licinius  only  now  remained  between  Constantino  and  his 
longed-for  position  as  sole  emperor  and  absolute  ruler,  the 
bishops  and  their  political  church-followers  prayed  against 
Licinius  and  for  Constantine.  As  these  "worldly-minded 
bishops,  instead  of  caring  for  the  salvation  of  their  flocks, 
were  often  but  too  much  inclined  to  travel  about  and 
entangle  themselves  in  worldly  concerns "  (Neander s), 
Licinius  attempted  to  check  it.  To  stop  their  meddling 
with  the  political  affairs  of  his  dominions,  he  forbade  the 
bishops  to  assemble  together  or  to  pass  from  their  own 
dioceses  to  others.  He  enacted  that  women  should  be 
instructed  only  by  women  ;  that  in  their  assemblies  the  men 
and  the  women  should  sit  separate  ;  and  commanded  that 
they  of  Nicomedia  should  meet  outside  the  city,  as  the  open 
air  was  more  healthful  for  such  large  assemblies. 

This  only  tended  to  make  the  bishops  more  active,  as  the 
acts  of  Licinius  could  be  counted  as  persecution.  Licinius 
next  went  so  far  as  to  remove  from  all  public  office  whoever 
would  not  sacrifice  to  the  gods,  and  the  line  was  quickly 
drawn  once  more  in  his  dominion  in  favor  of  paganism. 
This  caused  Constantino's  party  to  put  on  a  bolder  face, 
and  they  not  only  prayed  for  Constantine  against  Licinius, 
but  they  began  to  invent  visions  in  which  they  pretended  to 

7  Id.,  chap.  xlii. 

8  "History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First,  part 
1,  div.  A,  par.  26. 


270  CON8TANTINE  AND   TEE  BISHOPS. 

see  the  "legions  of  Constantino  marching  victoriously 
through  the  streets  at  midday."  —Neander* 

These  enactments  on  the  part  of  Licinius  furnished  the 
new  Moses  with  an  opportunity  to  conquer  the  heathen  in 
the  wilderness,  and  to  go  on  to  the  possession  of  the  prom- 
ised land  and  the  full  establishment  of  the  new  theocracy. 
War  was  declared,  %and  Constantine,  with  the  labarum  at  the 
head  of  his  army,  took  up  his  march  toward  the  dominions 
of  Licinius. 

Another  step  was  now  taken  in  furtherance  of  the  theo- 
cratical  idea,  and  in  imitation  of  the  original  Moses.  It  will 
be  remembered  that,  after  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  Moses 
erected  a  tabernacle,  and  pitched  it  afar  off  from  the  camp, 
where  he  went  to  consult  the  Lord  and  to  receive  what  the 
Lord  had  to  give  in  commandment  to  Israel.  Constantine, 
to  sustain  his  part  in  this  scheme  of  a  new  theocracy,  and 
as  far  as  possible  to  conform  to  the  theocratical  plans  of  the 
bishops,  likewise  erected  a  tabernacle,  and  pitched  it  a  con- 
siderable distance  from  his  camp.  To  this  tabernacle  he 
would  repair  and  pretend  to  have  visions  and  communica- 
tions from  the  Lord,  and  to  receive  directions  in  regard  to 
his  expected  battles  with  Licinius.  The  original  account  is 
as  follows :  — 

"In  this  manner  Licinius  gave  himself  up  to  these  impieties,  and 
rushed  blindly  towards  the  gulf  of  destruction.  But  as  soon  as  the 
emperor  was  aware  that  he  must  meet  his  enemies  in  a  second  battle,  he 
applied  himself  in  earnestness  to  the  worship  of  his  Saviour.  He  pitched 
the  tabernacle  of  the  cross  outside  and  at  a  distance  from  his  camp,  and 
there  passed  his  time  in  pure  and  holy  seclusion,  and  in  offering  up 
prayers  to  God ;  following  thus  the  example  of  his  ancient  prophet,  of 
whom  the  sacred  oracles  testify  that  he  pitched  the  tabernacle  without 
the  camp.  He  was  attended  only  by  a  few,  of  whose  faith  and  piety,  as 
well  as  affection  to  his  person,  he  was  well  assured.  And  this  custom 
he  continued  to  observe  whenever  he  meditated  an  engagement  with 
the  enemy.  For  he  was  deliberate  in  his  measures,  the  better  to  insure 
safety,  and  desired  in  everything  to  be  directed  by  divine  counsel.  And 
since  his  prayers  ascended  with  fervor  and  earnestness  to  God,  he  was 
9  ld.t  Section  First,  part  i,  dlv.  A,  par.  27. 


ORIGINAL   STATE   CHAPLAINCIES. 

always  honored  with  a  manifestation  of  his  presence.  And  then,  as  if 
moved  by  a  divine  impulse,  he  would  rush  from  the  tabernacle,  and  sud- 
denly give  orders  to  his  army  to  move  at  once  without  delay,  and  on  the 
instant  to  draw  their  swords.  On  this  they  would  immediately  commence 
the  attack,  with  great  and  general  slaughter,  so  as  with  incredible  celerity 
to  secure  the  victory,  and  raise  trophies  in  token  of  the  overthrow  of  their 
enemies."  —  Eusebius.10 

He  soon  carried  this  matter  somewhat  farther,  and  pro- 
vided a  tabernacle  in  each  legion,  with  attendant  priests  and 
deacons,  and  also  another  which  was  constructed  in  the  form 
of  a  church,  "so  that  in  case  he  or  his  army  might  be  led 
into  the  desert,  they  might  have  a  sacred  edifice  in  which  to 
praise  and  worship  God,  and  participate  in  the  mysteries. 
Priests  and  deacons  followed  the  tent  for  the  purpose  of  offi- 
ciating therein,  according  to  the  law  and  regulations  of  the 
church. "  —  Sozomen. n 

Such  was  the  original  establishment  of  state  chaplaincies. 
And  it  is  but  proper  to  remark  that  the  system,  wherever 
copied,  has  always  been  worthy  of  the  original  imposture. 

The  outcome  of  the  war  between  Constantine  and  Licinius 
we  have  already  related  ;  also  his  murder  of  Licinius.  And 
when,  in  violation  of  his  solemn  oath  to  his  sister  Constantia, 
Constantine  caused  Licinius  to  be  executed,  the  courtier- 
bishop  justified  the  wicked  transaction  as  being  the  lawful 
execution  of  the  will  of  God  upon  the  enemy  of  God.  Thus 
he  speaks  :  — 

"  He  then  proceeded  to  deal  with  this  adversary  of  God  and  his 
followers  according  to  the  laws  of  war,  and  consign  them  to  the 
fate  which  their  crimes  deserved.  Accordingly  the  tyrant  himself 
[Licinius]  and  they  whose  counsels  had  supported  him  in  his  impiety, 
were  together  subjected  to  the  just  punishment  of  death.  After  this, 
those  who  had  so  lately  been  deceived  by  their  vain  confidence  in  false 
deities,  acknowledged  with  unfeigned  sincerity  the  God  of  Constantine, 
and  openly  professed  their  belief  in  him  as  the  true  and  only  God."  — 

10  "  Life  of  Constantine,"  book  ii,  chap  xil. 

11  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  I,  chap.  viH. 
18  "  Life  of  Constantine,"  book  ii,  chap,  xviii. 


272  GONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

When  Constantine  went  to  take  his  seat  as  presiding 
officer  in  the  Council  of  Nice,  his  theocratical  flatterers  pre- 
tended to  be  dazzled  by  his  splendor,  as  though  an  angel  of 
God  had  descended  straight  from  heaven,  and  he  who  sat  at 
Constantine's  right  hand  that  day,  thus  testifies  :  — 

"And  now,  all  rising  at  the  signal  which  indicated  the  emperor's  en- 
trance, at  last  he  himself  proceeded  through  the  midst  of  the  assembly, 
like  some  heavenly  messenger  of  God." — •  Eusebius.13 

Constantine,  to  sustain  his  part  in  the  farce,  declared 
openly  in  the  council  that  "  the  crimes  of  priests  ought  not  to 
be  made  known  to  the  multitude,  lest  they  should  become  an 
occasion  of  offense  or  of  sin  ;  "  and  that  if  he  should  detect 
"  a  bishop  in  the  very  act  of  committing  adultery,"  he  would 
throw  "his  imperial  robe  over  the  unlawful  deed,  lest  any 
should  witness  the  scene,"  and  be  injured  by  the  bad  exam- 
ple." -Tkeodoret.™  And  when  the  council  was  closed  and 
the  creed  for  which  they  had  come  together  was  established,  he 
sent  a  letter  to  the  "  Catholic  Church  of  the  Alexandrians,"  in 
which  he  announced  that  the  conclusions  reached  by  the  coun- 
cil were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  could  be  none  other 
than  the  divine  will  concerning  the  doctrine  of  God. 

After  the  council  was  over,  he  gave  a  banquet  in  honor 
of  the  twentieth  year  of  his  reign,  to  which  he  invited  the 
bishops  and  clergy  who  had  attended  the  council.  The 
bishops  responded  by  pretending  that  it  seemed  to  be  the 
very  likeness  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  itself.  The  de- 
scription is  as  follows  :  — 

"The  emperor  himself  invited  and  feasted  with  those  ministers  of 
.God  whom  he  had  reconciled,  and  thus  offered  as  it  were  through  them 
a  suitable  sacrifice  to  God.  Not  one  of  the  bishops  was  wanting  at  the 
imperial  banquet,  the  circumstances  of  which  were  splendid  beyond 
description.  Detachments  of  the  body  guard  and  other  troops  sur- 
rounded the  entrance  of  the  palace  with  drawn  swords,  and  through  the 
midst  of  these  the  men  of  God  proceeded  without  fear  into  the  innermost 
of  the  imperial  apartments,  in  which  some  were  the  emperor's  own  com- 
panions at  table,  while  others  reclined  on  couches  arranged  on  either  side. 
13 7d.,  book  iii,  chap.  x.  u  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap,  xi. 


THE  BISHOPS  AND    THE  EMPEROR.  273 

One  might  have  thought  that  a  picture  of  Christ's  kingdom  was  thus  shad- 
owed forth,  and  that  the  scene  was  less  like  reality  than  a  dream. "— 
Eusebius. 15 

At  the  banquet  "the  emperor  himself  presided,  and  as 
the  feast  went  on,  called  to  himself  one  bishop  after  another, 
and  loaded  each  with  -gifts  in  proportion  to  his  deserts." 
This  so  delighted  the  bishops  that  one  of  them  —  James  of 
Nisibis,  a  member  of  that  monkish  tribe  who  habitually 
lived  on  grass,  browsing  like  oxen,  was  wrought  up  to  such 
a  height  that  he  declared  he  saw  angels  standing  round  the 
emperor.  Constantine,  not  to-  be  outdone,  saw  angels  stand- 
ing around  James,  and  pronounced  him  one  of  the  three 
pillars  of  the  world.  He  said,  "There  are  three  pillars  of 
the  world ;  Antony  in  Egypt,  Nicolas  of  Myra,  James  in 
Assyria."16 

Another  instance  of  this  mutual  cajolery  is  given  con- 
cerning Eusebius  and  the  emperor  as  follows  :  — 

"  One  act,  however,  I  must  by  no  means  omit  to  record,  which  this 
admirable  prince  performed  in  my  own  presence.  On  one  occasion, 
emboldened  by  the  confident  assurance  I  entertained  of  his  piety,  I  had 
begged  permission  to  pronounce  a  discourse  on  the  subject  of  our 
Saviour's  sepulcher  in  his  hearing.  With  this  request  he  most  readily 
complied,  and  in  the  midst  of  a  large  number  of  auditors,  in  the  interior 
of  the  palace  itself,  he  stood  and  listened  with  the  rest.  I  entreated  him 
(but  in  vain)  to  seat  himself  on  the  imperial  throne  which  stood  near  : 
he  continued  with  fixed  attention  to  weigh  the  topics  of  my  discourse, 
and  gave  his  own  testimony  to  the  truth  of  the  theological  doctrines  it 
contained.  After  some  time  had  passed,  the  oration  being  of  consider- 
able length,  I  was  myself  desirous  of  concluding  ;  but  this  he  would  not 
permit,  and  exhorted  me  to  proceed  td  the  very  end.  On  my  again 
entreating  him  to  sit,  he  in  his  turn  admonished  me  to  desist,  saying  it 
was  not  right  to  listen  in  a  careless  manner  to  the  discussion  of  doctrines 
relating  to  God  ;  and  again,  that  this  posture  was  good  and  profitable  to 
himself,  since  it  argued  a  becoming  reverence  to  stand  while  listening  to 
sacred  truths.  Having,  therefore  concluded  my  discourse,  I  returned 
home,  and  resumed  my  usual  occupations." — Eusebius. 17 

16 "Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iii,  chap.  15. 

16 Stanley,  "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  v,  par.  34. 

17 "Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iv,  chap,  xxxiii. 


274  CONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

Oonstantine  himself  occasionally  appeared  in  the  role  of 
preacher  also.  "  On  these  occasions  a  general  invitation 
was  issued,  and  thousands  of  people  went  to  the  palace  to 
hear  an  emperor  turned  preacher "  (Stanley  18 )  ;  they  were 
ready  at  the  strong  points  to  respond  with  loud  applause  and 
cheering.  At  times  he  would  attack  his  courtiers  for  their 
rapacity  and  worldliness  generally,  and  they,  understanding 
him  perfectly,  would  cheer  him  loudly  for  his  preaching,  and 
go  on  in  the  same  old  way  imitating  his  actions. 

Again  :  when  his  mother  sent  the  nails  of  the  true  cross  to 
him  from  Jerusalem  with  the  instruction  that  some  of  them 
should  be  used  as  bridle  bits  for  his  war-horse,  it  was  counted 
a  further  evidence  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  come  ;  for 
it  was  made  to  be  the  fulfillment  of  that  which  "  Zacha- 
riah  the  prophet  predicted,  '  that  what  is  upon  the  bridles  of 
the  horses  shall  be  holiness  unto  the  Lord  Almighty." 
Theodoret.™  And  when  he  appointed  his  sons  and  nephews 
as  Csesars  to  a  share  in  the  governmental  authority,  this  was 
made  to  be  a  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  vii,  17, 
"  The  saints  of  the  Most  High  shall  take  the  kingdom !  " 

Yet  more  than  this  :  Eusebius  actually  argued  that  the 
emperor- s  dining  hall  might  be  the  New  Jerusalem  described 
in  the  book  of  Revelation.20  And  at  the  celebration  of  the 
thirtieth  year  of  his  reign,  another  of  the  bishops  was  so 
carried  away  with  the  imperial  honors  conferred  upon  him, 
that  he  went  so  far  as  to  declare  that  Constantine  had  been 
constituted  by  God  to  rule  over  all  in  the  present  world,  and 
was  destined  also  by  the  Lord  to  reign  with  the  Son  of  God 
in  the  world  to  come.  This,  it  seems,  was  rather  too  much 
even  for  Constantine,  and  he  exhorted  the  gushing  bishop 
not  to  use  such  language  any  more ;  but  instead  to  pray 
for  him  that  he  might  be  accounted  worthy  to  be  a  servant 

18  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  24. 

19  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap,  xviil. 

20 " Encyclopedia Britannica,"  article  "Millennium." 


CONSTANTINE  SENT   TO  HEAVEN.  375 

of   God,  rather   than  joint  ruler,  in  the  world  to    come.  — 
Eusebius.*1 

But  after  he  was  dead,  and  therefore  unable  to  put 
any  check  upon  the  extravagance  of  their  adulation,  Eu- 
sebius  pretended  to  hesitate  as  to  whether  it  would  not  be 
committing  gross  sacrilege  to  attempt  to  write  his  life. 
However,  he  finally  concluded  to  venture  upon  it.  Some  of 
his  statements  we  have  already  given  ;  but  there  are  a  few 
more  that  should  be  reproduced  in  this  connection.  Refer- 
ring to  Constantino's  lying  in  state  so  long  before  his  sons 
assumed  the  imperial  authority,  he  says  :  — 

"No  mortal  had  ever,  like  this  blessed  prince,  continued  to  reign 
even  after  his  death,  and  to  receive  the  same  homage  as  during  his  life  : 
he  only,  of  all  who  have  ever  lived,  obtained  this  reward  from  God  :  a 
suitable  reward,  since  he  alone  of  all  sovereigns  had  in  all  his  actions 
honored  the  supreme  God  and  his  Christ,  and  God  himself  accordingly 
was  pleased  that  even  his  mortal  remains  should  still  retain  imperial 
authority  among  men."21 

This  was  not  enough,  however.  It  must  needs  be  that 
God  should  set  him  forth  as  the  pattern  of  the  human  race  : — 

"And  God  himself,  whom  Constantine  worshiped,  has  confirmed  this 
truth  by  the  clearest  manifestations  of  his  will,  being  present  to  aid  him 
at  the  commencement,  during  the  course,  and  at  the  end  of  his  reign,  and 
holding  him  up  to  the  human  race  as  an  exemplary  pattern  of  godliness."23 

Next,  he  seeks  some  object  worthy  to  be  a  standard  of 
comparison  for  "this  marvelous  man."  But  he  is  unable 
to  find  any  such  thing  or  person  but  the  Saviour  himself. 
Therefore  he  declares  :  — 

"We  cannot  compare  him  with  that  bird  of  Egypt,  the  only  one,  as 
they  say,  of  its  kind,  which  dies,  self-sacrificed,  in  the  midst  of  aromatic 
perfumes,  and,  rising  from  its  own  ashes,  with  new  life  soars  aloft  in  the 
same  form  which  it  had  before.  Rather  did  he  resemble  his  Saviour, 

81  "  Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iv.  chap,  xlviii. 

22  Id.,  book  iv,  chap.  Ixvii. 

23  7d.,  book  i,  chap.  iv. 


276  CONSTANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

who,  as  the  sown  corn  which  is  multiplied  from  a  single  grain,  had 
yielded  abundant  increase  through  the  blessing  of  God,  and  had  over- 
spread the  world  with  his  fruit.  Even  so  did  our  thrice  blessed  prince 
become  multiplied,  as  it  were,  through  the  succession  of  his  sons.  His 
statue  was  erected  along  with  theirs  in  every  province  ;  and  the  name  of 
Constantine  was  owned  and  honored  even  after  the  close  of  his  mortal 
life."24 

But  even  this  does  not-  satisfy  the  aspirations  of  the 
episcopal  adulator.  The  task  is  now  become  one  of  such 
grandeur  as  to  transcend  all  his  powers  ;  he  stops  amazed, 
and  in  impotence  resigns  it  all  to  Christ,  who  only,  he 
professes,  is  worthy  to  do  the  subject  justice  :  — 

"For  to  whatever  quarter  I  direct  my  view,  whether  to  the  east,  or 
to  the  west,  or  over  the  whole  world,  or  toward  .heaven  itself,  I  see  the 
blessed  emperor  everywhere  present  ;  .  .  .  and  I  see  him  still  living  and 
powerful,  and  governing  the  general  interests  of  mankind  more  com- 
pletely than  ever  before,  being  multiplied  as  it  were  by  the  succession  of 
his  children  to  the  imperial  power.  .  .  . 

"And  I  am  indeed  amazed  when  I  consider  that  he  who  was  but 
lately  visible  and  present  with  us  in  his  mortal  body,  is  still,  even  after 
death,  when  the  natural  thought  disclaims  all  superfluous  distinctions  as 
unsuitable,  most  marvelously  endowed  with  the  same  imperial  dwellings, 
and  honors,  and  praises,  as  heretofore.  But  further,  when  I  raise  my 
thoughts  even  to  the  arch  of  heaven,  and  there  contemplate  his  thrice 
blessed  soul  in  communion  with  God  himself,  freed  from  eveiy  mortal 
and  earthly  vesture,  and  shining  in  a  refulgent  robe  of  light ;  and  when 
I  perceive  that  it  is  no  more  connected  with  the  fleeting  periods  and 
occupations  of  mortal  life,  but  honored  with  an  ever-blooming  crown, 
and  an  immortality  of  endless  and  blessed  existence  ;  I  stand  as  it  were 
entranced  and  deprived  of  all  power  of  utterance  :  and  so,  while  I  con- 
demn my  own  weakness,  and  impose  silence  on  myself,  I  resign  the  task 
of  speaking  his  praises  worthily  to  one  who  is  better  able,  even  to  him 
who  alone  has  power  (being  the  immortal  God  —  the  Word)  to  confirm 
the  truth  of  his  own  sayings."25 

All  this  with  much  more  to  the  same  puipose  is  set  forth 
by  that  bishop  who  above  all  others  is  entitled  "  one  of  the 
best  among  the  bishops  of  Constantino's  court,"  and  the  one 

24  Id.,  book  iv,  chap.  Ixxii.  25  Id.,  book  i,  chaps,  i,  ii. 


THE  MYSTERY  OF  INIQUITY.  277 

who  ' '  cannot  be  reckoned  among  the  number  of  the  ordinary 
court  bishops  of  his  period."  —Neander™ 

By  the  plain,  unbiased  facts  of  history,  Constantine  stands 
before  the  world  as  a  confirmed  and  constant  hypocrite,  a 
perjurer,  and  a  many-times  murderer.  And  yet  this  bishop, 
knowing  all  this,  hesitates  not  to  declare  him  the  special 
favorite  of  God  ;  to  liken  him  to  Jesus  Christ ;  to  make  God 
indorse  him  to  the  human  race  as  an  example  of  godliness  ; 
and  to  exalt  him  so  high  that  no  one  but  "the  immortal 
God  "  can  worthily  speak  his  praises  ! 

When  one  of  the  best  of  the  bishops  of  his  court,  one  who 
was  familiar  with  the  whole  course  of  his  evil  life,  could  see 
in  the  life  and  actions  of  such  a  man  as  this,  a  Moses,  and 
angels,  and  the  New  Jerusalem,  and  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  even  the  Lord  Christ- — when  in  such  a  life,  all  this 
could  be  seen  by  one  of  the  best  of  the  bishops,  we  can  only 
wonderingly  inquire  what  could  not  be  seen  there  by  the 
worst  of  the  bishops  ! 

Can  any  one  wonder,  or  can  any  reasonable  person  'dis- 
pute, that  from  a  mixture  composed  of  such  bishops  and  such 
a  character,  there  should  come  the  mystery  of  iniquity  in  all 
its  hideous  enormity  f 


NOTE    ON    CONSTANTINE  S    VISION    OF    THE    CROSS. 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  account  of  Constantino  nothing  has  been 
said  about  his  "vision  of  the  cross,"  of  which  so  much  h;is  been  said  by  almost 
every  other  writer  who  has  gone  over  this  ground.  For  this  there  are  two  main 
reasons.  First,  There  is  no  point  in  the  narrative  where  it  could  have  been  in- 
troduced, even  though  it  were  true.  Second,  The  whole  story  is  so  manifestly 
a  lie  that  it  is  unworthy  of  serious  notice  in  any  narrative  that  makes  any  preten- 
sions to  truth  or  soberness. 

There  is  no  point  at  which  such  an  account  could  be  inserted,  because  nobody 
ever  heard  of  it  until  "long  after"  it  was  said  to  have  occurred  ;  and  then  it 
was  made  known  by  Constantine  himself  to  Eusebius  only,  and  was  never  made  a 
matter  of  record  until  after  Constautine's  death. 


26  "  History  of  the  Christian  Keligion  and  Church,"   Vol.   ii,  Section  First, 
part  i,  <"iv.  A,  par.  45,  note. 


278  CON8TANTINE  AND    THE  BISHOPS. 

These  things  of  themselves  would  go  far  to  discredit  the  story;  but  when  it 
is  borne  in  mind  that  the  only  record  that  was  even  then  made  of  it  was  in 
Eusebius's  "  Life  of  Constantine,"  the  character  of  which  is  quite  clearly  seen  in 
the  extracts  which  we  have  made  from  it  in  this  chapter,  the  story  may  be  entirely 
discredited.  Eusebius's  words  are  as  follows  :  — 

"While  he  was  thus  praying  with  fervent  entreaty,  a  most  marvelous  sign 
appeared  to  him  from  heaven,  the  account  of  which  it  might  have  been  difficult 
to  receive  with  credit,  had  it  been  related  by  any  other  person.  But  since  the 
victorious  emperor  himself  long  afterwards  declared  it  to  the  writer  of  this 
history,  when  he  was  honored  with  his  acquaintance  and  society,  and  confirmed 
his  statement  by  an  oath,  who  could  hesitate  to  accredit  the  relation,  especially 
since  the  testimony  of  after-time  has  established  its  truth?  "  27 

It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  this  account  is  of  the  same  nature  as  that  of 
Eusebius's  "  Life  of  Constantine  "  throughout.  It  is  of  the  same  piece  with  that 
by  which  "  no  mortal  was  allowed  to  contribute  to  the  elevation  of  Constantine." 
If  it  should  be  pleaded  that  Constantine  confirmed  his  statement  by  an  oath, 
the  answer  is  that  this  is  no  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  statement.  "  That 
the  emperor  attested  it  on  oath,  as  the  historian  tells  us,  is  indeed  no  additional 
guarantee  for  the  emperor's  veracity." —  Stanley. z& 

He  gave  his  oath  to  his  sister  as  a  pledge  for  the  life  of  her  husband,  and 
shortly  had  him  killed.  In  short,  when  Constantine  confirmed  a  statement,  by 
an  oath,  this  was  about  the  best  evidence  that  he  could  give  that  the  statement 
was  a  lie.  This  is  the  impression  clearly  conveyed  by  Stanley's  narrative,  as  may 
be  seen  by  a  comparison  of  Lecture  iii,  par.  11;  Lecture  iv,  par.  9;  Lecture  vi, 
par.  10,  and  is  sustained  by  the  evidence  of  Constantine's  whole  imperial  course. 

In  addition  to  this,  there  is  the  fact  that  Eusebius  himself  only  credited  the 
story  because  it  came  from  Constantine,  and  because  it  was  established  "  by  the 
testimony  of  after-time,"  in  which  testimony  he  was  ever  ready  to  see  the  most 
wonderful  evidence  of  God's  special  regard  for  Constantine;  and  the  further  fact 
that  it  was  one  of  the  principles  of  Eusebius  that  "  it  may  be  lawful  and  fitting 
to  use  falsehood  as  a  medicine,  for  the  advantage  of  those  who  require  such  a 
method,"29  which  principle  is  fully  illustrated  in  his  dealings  with  Constantine. 

When  all  these  things,  and  many  others  which  might  be  mentioned,  are  fairly 
considered,  they  combine  to  make  the  story  of  Constantine's  vision  of  the  cross, 
utterly  unworthy  of  the  slightest  credit,  or  any  place,  in  any  sober  or  exact  his- 
tory. Therefore  I  do,  and  all  others  ought  to,  fully  concur  in  the  opinion  that 
this  "  flattering  fable  "  "  can  claim  no  place  among  the  authentic  records  of  his- 
tory; and  by  writers  whose  only  object  is  truth,  it  may  very  safely  be  consigned 
to  contempt  and  oblivion."  —  Waddington.30 


27 "  Life  of  Constantine,"  book  i,  chap,  xxviii. 

28  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  vi,  par.  10. 

29  Quoted  by  Waddington  in  "  Note  on  Eusebius,"  at  the  end  of  chapter  yi, 
of  his  "History  of  the  Church." 

80  "  History  of  the  Church,"  chap,  vi,  par.  3. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


THE  UNION   OF  CHURCH   AND  STATE. 

T  F  the  mutual  flattery  of  Constantino  and  the  bishops  had 
i  concerned  only  themselves,  it  would  have  been  a  matter  of 
very  slight  importance  indeed  ;  but  this  was  not  so.  Each 
side  represented  an  important  interest.  Constantine  merely 
represented  the  State,  and  the  bishops  the  church  ;  and  their 
mutual  flattery  was  only  the  covering  of  a  deep  laid  and  far 
reaching  scheme  which  each  party  was  determined  to  work 
to  the  utmost,  for  its  own  interests.  "It  was  the  aim  of 
Constantine  to  make  theology  a  branch  of  politics  ;  it  was 
the  hope  of  every  bishop  in  the  empire  to  make  politics  a 
branch  of  theology."  —  Draper.1  Consequently,  in  their 
mutual  toadyism  were  involved  the  interests  of  both  the 
Church  and  the  State,  and  the  welfare  of  human  society  for 
ages  to  come. 

Therefore,  ' '  To  the  reign  of  Constantine  the  Great  must 
be  referred  the  commencement  of  those  dark  and  dismal 
times  which  oppressed  Europe  for  a  thousand  years.  It  is 
the  true  close  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  beginning  of  the 
Greek.  The  transition  from  one  to  the  other  is  emphatically 
and  abruptly  marked  by  a  new  metropolis,  a  new  religion,  a 
new  code,  and,  above  all,  a  new  policy.  An  ambitious  man 
had  attained  to  imperial  power  by  personating  the  interests 
of  a  rapidly  growing  party.  The  unavoidable  consequences 
were  a  union  between  the  Church  and  the  State,  a  diverting 

1  "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  chap,  x,  par.  6. 
24  [279] 


280  THE    UNION  OF   CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

of  the  dangerous  classes  from  civil  to  ecclesiastical  paths, 
and  the  decay  and  materialization  of  religion."  -Draper.* 

To  set  forth  the  true  account  of  the  seed  that  was  sown  in 
the  workings  of  this  mutual  intrigue,  and  to  indicate  certain 
inevitable  fruits  thereof,  must  now  employ  our  thoughts. 
As  we  are  to  consider  acts  which  were  very  far-reaching,  and 
trace  their  consequences,  we  shall  follow  to  its  logical  results 
each  special  act  as  it  occurs,  before  noticing  the  next  one. 

When  the  alliance  was  formed  between  Constantine  and 
what  was  represented  to  him  as  Christianity,  it  was  with  the 
idea  on  his  part  that  this  religion  formed  a  united  body 
throughout  the  empire.  As  has  been  shown,  this  was  true 
in  a  certain  sense,  because  the  persecution  as  carried  on  by 
Galerius  under  the  edicts  of  Diocletian,  was  against  Chris- 
tianity as  a  profession,  without  any  distinction  whatever  as 
to  its  phases,  and  this  caused  all  the  different  sects  to  stand 
together  as  one  in  defense  of  the  principles  that  were  com- 
mon to  all.  Therefore  the  essential  unity  of  all  the  profes- 
sions of  Christianity  he  supposed  to  be  a  fact ;  and  from  all 
his  actions  and  writings  afterward  it  is  certain  that  represen- 
tations had  been  made  to  him  by  the  bishops  in  a  stronger 
measure  than  was  true,  and  in  an  infinitely  stronger  measure 
than  he  found  it  in  practice  to  be. 

As  has  also  been  shown,  the  alliance  with  Christianity  on 
his  part  was  wholly  political,  and  merely  a  part  of  the  polit- 
ical machinery  by  which  he  designed  to  bring  together  again 
the  divided  elements  of  the  empire  into  one  harmonious  whole, 
as  contemplated  by  Diocletian.  It  being  represented  to  him 
by  the  bishops  who  met  him  in  Gaul  in  A.  D.  311,  that 
Christianity  was  a  united  body  which,  if  he  would  support  it, 
would  in  turn  be  a  powerful  support  to  him,  he  accepted 
their  representations  as  the  truth,  and  formed  the  alliance 
solely  as  a  part  of  his  political  designs,  and  to  help  him  to 
forward  his  declared  "mission  to  unite  the  world  under  one 
head." 

8  Id.,  chap,  ix,  par.  24, 


A   FALSE   UNITY.  281 

But  an  apparent  unity  upon  the  grand  principles  common 
to  all  sects  of  Christianity,  created  by  a  defense  of  the  rights 
of  Christians  to  believe  and  to  worship  according  to  the 
dictates  of  their  own  conscience,  and  a  real  unity  which 
would  stand  together  in  Christian  brotherhood  under  the 
blandishments  of  imperial  favor,  were  two  very  different 
things.  It  was  easy  enough  for  all  the  sects  in  which 
Christianity  claimed  at  that  time  to  be  represented,  to  stand 
together  against  an  effort  of  the  imperial  power  to  crush  out 
of  existence  the  very  name,  as  well  as  the  right  to  profess 
it.  It  was  not  so  easy  for  these  same  denominations  to 
stand  together  as  one,  representing  the  charity  and  unifying 
influence  of  Christianity,  when  imperial  support,  imperial 
influence,  and  imperial  power,  were  the  prizes  to  be  gained. 

Therefore,  although  the  alliance  was  formed  with  what 
was  supposed  to  be  Christianity  as  a  whole,  without  any 
respect  to  internal  divisions,  it  was  very  soon  discovered 
that  each  particular  faction  of  the  Christian  profession  was 
ambitious  to  be  recognized  as  the  one  in  which,  above  all 
others,  Christianity  was  most  certainly  represented.  The 
bishops  were  ready  and  willing  to  represent  to  Constantine 
that  Christianity  was  one.  They  did  so  represent  it  to  him. 
And  although  he  entered  the  alliance  with  that  understand- 
ing, the  alliance  had  no  sooner  been  well  formed  than  it 
devolved  upon  him  to  decide  among  the  conflicting  factions 
and  divisions  just  where  that  one  was  to  be  found. 

The  Edict  of  Milan  ordered  that  the  church  property 
which  had  been  confiscated  by  the -edicts  of  Diocletian, 
should  be  restored  to  "the  whole  body  of  Christians,"  with- 
out any  distinction  as  to  particular  sects  or  names.  Thus 
runs  that  part  of  the  edict  :  - 

"And  this  we  further  decree,  with  respect  to  the  Christians,  that  the 
places  in  which  they  were  formerly  accustomed  to  assemble,  concerning 
which  also  we  formerly  wrote  to  your  fidelity,  in  a  different  form,  that  if 
any  persons  have  purchased  these,  either  from  our  treasury,  or  from  any 
other  one,  these  shall  restore  them  to  the  Christians,  without  money  and 


282  THE   UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

without  demanding  any  price,  without  any  superadded  value  or  augmen- 
tation, without  delayer  hesitancy.  And  if  any  have  happened  to  receive 
these  places  as  presents,  that  they  shall  restore  them  as  soon  as  possible 
to  the  Christians,  so  that  if  either  those  that  purchased  or  those  that 
received  them  as  presents,  have  anything  to  request  of  our  munificence, 
they  may  go  to  the  provincial  governor,  as  the  judge  ;  that  provision 
may  also  be  made  for  them  by  our  clemency.  All  which  it  will  be 
necessary  to  be  delivered  up  to  the  body  of  Christians,  by  your  care, 
without  any  delay. 

"And  since  the  Christians  themselves  are  known  to  have  had  not 
only  those  places  where  they  were  accustomed  to  meet,  but  other  places 
also,  belonging  not  to  individuals  among  them,  but  to  the  right  of  the 
whole  body  of  Christians,  you  will  also  command  all  these,  by  virtue  of 
the  law  before  mentioned,  without  any  hesitancy,  to  be  restored  to  these 
same  Christians,  that  is,  to  their  body,  and  to  each  conventicle  respect- 
ively. The  aforesaid  consideration,  to  wit,  being  observed  ;  namely, 
that  they  who -as  we  have  said  restore  them  without  valuation  and  price, 
may  expect  their  indemnity  from  our  munificence  and  liberality.  In  all 
which  it  will  be  incumbent  on  you,  to  exhibit  your  exertions  as  much  as 
possible  to  the  aforesaid  body  of  Christians,  that  our  orders  may  be  most 
speedily  accomplished,  that  likewise  in  this  provision  may  be  made  by 
our  clemency,  for  the  preservation  of  the  common  and  public  tranquillity. 
For  by  these  means,,  as  before  said,  the  divine  favor  with  regard  to  us, 
which  we  have  already  experienced  in  many  affairs,  will  continue  firm 
and  permanent  at  all  times. 

"  But  that  the  purpose  of  this  our  ordinance  and  liberality  may  be 
extended  to  the  knowledge  of  all,  it  is  expected  that  these  things  written, 
by  us,  should  be  proposed  and  published  to  the  knowledge  of  all.  That 
this  act  of  our  liberality  and  kindness  may  remain  unknown  to  none."  3 

This  was  proper  enough  in  itself.  But  Constantine  and 
the  bishops  had  formed  an  alliance  for  political  purposes. 
The  bishops  had  lent  to  Constantine  their  support,  the  fruit 
of  which  he  was  enjoying  ;  and  now  they  demanded  that  the 
expected  return  should  be  rendered.  Accordingly,  the  res- 
toration of  the  property  of  the  Christians,  under  the  Edict 
of  Milan,  had  no  sooner  begun,  than  the  contentions  which 
had  been  raised  before  the  late  persecution,  between  the 
church  of  Rome  and  the  churches  of  Africa,  were  not  only 
made  to  assume  new  and  political  significance,  but  were 

3Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  x,  chap.  v. 


THE   CATHOLIC  CHURCH  ESTABLISHED.          283 

made  an  issue  upon  which  to  secure  the  imperial  recognition 
and  the  legal  establishment  of  the  Catholic  Church.  As  the 
rule  had  already  been  established  that  all  who  did  not  agree 
with  the  bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church  were  necessarily 
heretics,  and  not  Christians,  it  was  now  claimed  by  the 
Catholic  Church  that  therefore  none  such  could  be  par- 
takers of  the  benefits  of  the  edict  restoring  property  to  the 
Christians.  The  Catholic  Church  disputed  the  right  of  heretics 
to  receive  property  or  money  under  the  Edict  of  Milan,  by 
disputing  their  right  to  the  title  of  Christians.  This  forced 
an  imperial  decision  upon  the  question  as  to  who  were 
Christians.  The  dispute  wras  raised  in  Africa.  Anulinus 
was  proconsul  in  that  province.  To  settle  this  Question, 
Constantine  issued  the  following  edict  :  — 

"Hail,  our  most  esteemed  Anulinus  :  This  is  the  course  of  our 
benevolence  ;  that  we  wish  those  things  that  belong  justly  to  others, 
should  not  only  remain  unmolested,  but  should  also,  when  necessary,  be 
restored,  most  esteemed  Anulinus.  Whence  it  is  our  will,  that  when 
thou  shall  receive  this  epistle,  if  any  of  those  things  belonging  to  the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  Christians  in  the  several  cities  or  other  places,  are 
now  possessed  either  by  the  decurions,  or  any  others,  these  thou  shalt 
cause  immediately  to  be  restored  to  their  churches.  Since  we  have  pre- 
viously determined,  that  whatsoever  these  same  churches  before  possessed, 
shall  be  restored  to  their  right.  When,  therefore,  your  fidelity  has 
understood  this  decree  of  our  orders  to  be  most  evident  and  plain,  make 
all  haste  to  restore,  as  soon  as  possible,  all  that  belongs  to  the  churches, 
whether  gardens  or  houses,  or  anything  else,  that  we  may  learn  thou 
hast  attended  to,  and  most  carefully  observed,  this  our  decree.  Farewell, 
most  esteemed  and  beloved  Anulinus,"  * 

By  this  it  was  made  evident  that  the  imperial  favors  were 
only  for  the  Catholic  Church.  Nor  was  it  enough  that  Con- 
stantine should  decide  that  all  his  favors  were  for  the  Cath- 
olic Church  ;  he  must  next  decide  which  was  the  CatJwlic 
Church.  This  was  brought  about  by  a  division  which  was 
created  in  the  church  at  Carthage,  having  its  origin  in  the 
late  persecution. 


284:  THE   UNION  OF   CHURCH  AND   STATS. 

The  edict  issued  by  Diocletian  had  commanded  the  magis- 
trates everywhere  to  compel  the  Christians  to  deliver  up 
the  Scriptures.  Some  Christians  did  so  ;  others  refused  and 
suffered  all  kinds  of  punishments  rather  than  to  do  so. 
"When  Constantine  formed  his  alliance  with  the  bishops, 
Mensurius  was  bishop  of  Carthage,  and  some  of  his  ene- 
mies had  falsely  accused  him  of  being  one  of  those  who 
had  delivered  up  the  Scriptures  rather  than  to  suffer. 
They  were  supported  by  a  certain  Donatus,  bishop  of  a 
city  in  Numidia,  and  they  separated  themselves  from  com- 
munion with  Mensurius.  When  Mensurius  died,,  as  the 
"primacy  of  the  African  church  was  the  object  of  am- 
bition to  these  two  parties "  (Mil-man 5),  and  as  this  prim- 
acy carried  with  it  imperial  patronage,  there  were  several 
candidates.  A  certain  Csecilianus  was  elected,  however, 
"in  spite  of  the  cabals  and  intrigues  of  Botrus  and  Csele- 
sius,  two  chief  presbyters  who  aspired  to  that  dignity."  — 
.Bower. 6 

Botrus  and  Cselesius  were  now  joined  by  Donatus  and 
his  party,  and  these  all  were  further  joined  and  supported 
by  a  certain  Lucilla,  a  woman  of  great  qualities,  wealth,  and 
interest,  and  an  avowed  enemy  to  Caecilianus.  This  faction 
gathered  together  about  seventy  of  the  bishops  of  Numidia 
for  the  purpose  of  deposing  Caecilianus  as  one  having  been 
illegally  chosen.  When  they  came  together  at  Carthage, 
they  found  that  the  great  majority  of  the  people  were  in 
favor  of  Csecilianus  ;  but  they  went  ahead,  nevertheless. 
They  summoned  him  to  the  council.  He  refused  to  go,  and 
it  was  well  that  he  did  so,  because  one  of  them  had  already 
said  of  him,  "  If  he  comes  among  us,  instead  of  laying  our 
hands  on  him  by  way  of  ordination,  we  ought  to  knock  out 
his  brains  by  wray  of  penance."-  —  Bower.1  A  council  com- 
posed of  men  of  this  character,  it  is  easy  to  believe,  were 
readily  susceptible  to  whatever  influence  might  be  brought 

5  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  10  from  the  end. 

6  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Melchiades,  par.  2.  7/d.,  par.  3. 


WHICH  IS   THE   CATHOLIC  CHURCH?  285 

to  bear  upon  them  to  bring  them  to  a  decision.  Lucilla,  by 
the  free  use  of  money,  succeeded  in  persuading  them  to 
declare  the  election  of  Csecilianus  void,  and  the  bishopric  of 
Carthage  vacant.  They  pronounced  him  and  all  who  held 
with  him  separated  from  their  communion,  and  proceeded  to 
elect  and  ordain  a  certain  Majorinus,  who  had  formerly  been 
one  of  Lucilla's  servants,  but  was  now  a  reader  in  the  church. 
Thus  stood  matters  in  the  church  in  Africa  when  in 
March,  A.  D.  313,  Constantine  sent  to  the  proconsul 
Anulinus  the  following  edict :  — 

"Health  to  thee,  most  esteemed  Anulinus.  As  it  appears  from  many 
circumstances  that  when  the  religion  was  despised,  in  which  the  highest 
reverence  of  the  heavenly  Majesty  is  observed,  that  our  public  affairs 
were  beset  with  great  dangers,  and  that  this  religion,  when  legally 
adopted  and  observed,  afforded  the  greatest  prosperity  to  the  Roman 
name,  and  distinguished  felicity  to  all  men,  as  it  has  been  granted  by 
the  divine  beneficence,  we  have  resolved  that  those  men  who  gave  their 
services  with  becoming  sanctity,  and  the  observance  of  thia  law,  to  the 
performance  of  divine  worship,  should  receive  the  recompense  for  their 
labors,  0  most  esteemed  Anulinus  ;  wherefore  it  is  my  will  that  these 
men,  within  the  province  intrusted  to  thee  in  the  Catholic  Church,  over 
which  Cacilianus  presides,  who  give  their  services  to  this  holy  religion, 
and  whom  they  commonly  call  clergy,  shall  be  held  totally  free  and  exempt 
from  all  public  offices,  to  the  end  that  they  may  not,  by  any  error  or  sacri- 
legious deviation,  be  drawn  away  from  the  service  due  to  the  Divinity, 
but  rather  may  devote  themselves  to  their  proper  law,  without  any 
molestation.  So  that,  whilst  they  exhibit  the  greatest  possible  reverence 
to  the  Deity,  it  appears  the  greatest  good  will  be  conferred  on  the  State. 
Farewell,  most  esteemed  and  beloved  Anulinus. "  8 

As  will  be  seen  later,  tlys  exemption  was  a  most  material 
benefit.  And  when  the  party  of  Majorinus  saw  themselves 
excluded. from  it,  they  claimed  that  they  were  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  therefore  really  the  ones  who  were  entitled  to  it. 
Accordingly,  they  drew  up  a  petition  to  the  emperor,  entitled, 
"The  petition  of  the  Catholic  Church,  containing  the  crimes 
of  Caecilianus,  by  the  party  of  Majorinus."—  Bowet\9  This 

8Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  x,  chap.  vii. 
8  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Melchiades,  par.  5. 


286  THE   UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

petition  requested  the  emperor  to  refer  to  the  bishops  of 
Gaul  the  controversy  between  them  and  Caecilianus.  The 
petition,  with  a  bundle  of  papers  containing  their  charges 
against  Caecilianus,  they  gave  to  the  proconsul  Anulinus,  who 
immediately  sent  it  by  a  messenger  to  Constantine,  and  sent 
also  by  the  same  messenger  a  letter  giving  him  an  account  of 
the  dispute.  When  Constantine  received  the  petition  and 
the  accompanying  papers,  he  appointed  three  of  the  principal 
bishops  of  Gaul  to  meet  with  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  examine 
the  matter,  and  sent  to  Melchiades,  the  then  bishop  of  Rome, 
the  following  letter  :  — 

"  Constantine  Augustus,  to  Miltiades  [  the  same  as  Melchiades],  bishop 
of  Rome,  and  to  Marcus  :  As  many  communications  of  this  kind  have 
been  sent  to  me  from  Anulinus,  the  most  illustrious  proconsul  of  Africa, 
in  which  it  is  contained  that  Csecilianus,  the  bishop  of  Carthage,  was 
accused,  in  many  respects,  by  his  colleagues  in  Africa ;  and  as  this  ap- 
pears to  be  grievous,  that  in  those  provinces  which  divine  Providence 
has  freely  intrusted  to  my  fidelity,  and  in  which  there  is  a  vast  popula- 
tion, the  multitude  are  found  inclining  to  deteriorate,  and  in  a  manner 
divided  into  two  parties,  and  among  others,  that  the  bishops  were  at 
variance  ;  I  have  resolved  that  the  same  Csecilianus,  together  with  ten 
bishops,  who  appear  to  accuse  him,  and  ten  others,  whom  he  himself  may 
consider  necessary  for  his  cause,  shall  sail  to  Rome.  That  you,  being 
present  there,  as  also  Reticius,  Maternus,  and  Marinus,  your  colleagues, 
whom  I  have  commanded  to  hasten  to  Rome  for  this  purpose,  may  be 
heard,  as  you  may  understand  most  consistent  with  the  most  sacred  law. 
And,  indeed,  that  you  may  have  the  most  perfect  knowledge  of  these 
matters.  I  have  subjoined  to  my  own  epistle  copies  of  the  writings  sent 
to  me  by  Anulinus,  and  sent  them  to  your  aforesaid  colleagues.  In 
which  your  gravity  will  read  and  consider  in  what  way  the  aforesaid 
cause  may  be  most  accurately  investigated  and  justly  decided.  Since  it 
neither  escapes  your  diligence,  that  I  show  such  regard  for  the  holy 
Catholic  Church,  that  I  wish  you,  upon  the  whole,  to  leave  no  room  for 
schism  or  division.  May  the  power  of  the  great  God  preserve  you  many 
years,  most  esteemed."  10 

% 

Several  other  bishops  besides  those  named  in  this  letter 

were  appointed  by.  the  emperor  to  attend  the  council,  so  that 

when  the  council  met,  there  were  nineteen  members  of  it. 

10Eusebius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  x,  chap.  v. 


COUNCILS   TO  DECIDE   THE   QUESTION.  287 

According  to  Constantino's  letter,  as  well  as  by  virtue  of  his 
own  position,  Melchiades  presided  in  the  council,  and  thus 
began  to  reap  in  imperial  recognition  and  joint  authority,  the 
fruit  of  the  offers  which  he  made  when  in  A.  D.  311  he  sent 
that  letter  and  delegation  of  bishops  to  Constantino  in  Gaul, 
inviting  him  to  the  conquest  of  Rome  and  the  deliverance  of 
the  church. 

The  council  met  in  the  apartments  of  the  empress,  in  the 
Lateran  Palace  in  Rome,  October  2,  313.  Caecilianus  ap- 
peared in  person,  and  Donatus  came  as  his  accuser.  The 
council  decided  that  none  of  the .  charges  were  proved,  pro- 
nounced Caecilianus  innocent,  and  Donatus  a  slanderer  and 
the  chief  author  of  all  the  contention.  Their  decision,  with 
a  full  account  of  the  proceedings,  was  immediately  sent  to 
Constantirie.  The  Donatists  appealed  from  the  council  to 
the  emperor,  demanding  a  larger  council,  on  the  plea  that 
the  bishops  who  composed  this  one  were  partial,  prejudiced, 
and  had  acted  hastily,  and,  besides  this,  were  too  few  in  num- 
ber properly  to  decide  a  matter  of  so  great  importance. 
Constantine  ordered  another  council  to  be  held  at  Aries,  to 
be  composed  of  "many  bishops."  The  following  is  the  let- 
ter he  sent  to  one  of  the  bishops  who  was  summoned  to 
Aries,  and  will  show  his  wishes  in  the  matter  :  — 

"Constantine  Augustus,  to  Chrestus,  bishop  of  Syracuse  :  As  there 
were  some  already  before  who  perversely  and  wickedly  began  to  waver 
in  the  holy  religion  and  celestial  virtue,  and  to  abandon  the  doctrine  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  desirous,  therefore,  of  preventing  such  disputes 
among  them,  I  had  thus  written,  that  this  subject,  which  appeared  to  be 
agitated  among  them,  might  be  rectified,  by  delegating  certain  bishops 
from  Gaul,  and  summoning  others  of  the  opposite  parties  from  Africa, 
who  are  pertinaciously  and  incessantly  contending  with  one  another, 
that  by  a  careful  examination  of  the  matter  in  their  presence,  it  might 
thus  be  decided.  But  since,  as  it  happens,  some,  forgetful  of  their  own 
salvation,  and  the  reverence  due  to  our  most  holy  religion,  even  now  do 
not  cease  to  protract  their  own  enmity,  being  unwilling  to  conform  to 
the  decision  already  promulgated,  and  asserting  that  they  were  very  few 
that  advanced  their  sentiments  and  opinions,  or  else  that  all  points  which 


288  TEE    UNION  OF   CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

ought  to  have  been  first  fully  discussed  not  being  first  examined,  they 
proceeded  with  too  much  haste  and  precipitancy  to  give  publicity  to  the 
decision.  Hence  it  has  happened  that  those  very  persons  who  ought  to 
exhibit  a  brotherly  and  peaceful  unanimity,  rather  disgracefully  and  de- 
testably are  at  variance  with  one  another,  and  thus  give  this  occasion  of 
derision  to  those  that  are  without,  and  whose  minds  are  averse  to  our 
most  holy  religion.  Hence  it  has  appeared  necessary  to  me  to  provide 
that  this  matter,  which  ought  to  have  ceased  after  the  decision  was  issued 
by  their  own  voluntary  agreement,  now,  at  length,  should  be  fully  ter- 
minated by  the  intervention  of  many. 

"  Since,  therefore,  we  have  commanded  many  bishops  to  meet  to- 
gether from  different  and  remote  places,  in  the  city  of  Aries,  towards  the 
calends  of  August,  I  have  also  thought  proper  to  write  to  thee,  that 
taking  a  public  vehicle  from  the  most  illustrious  Latroniarius,  corrector 
of  Sicily,  and  taking  with  thee  two  others  of  the  second  rank,  which  thou 
mayest  select,  also  three  servants  to  afford  you  services  on  the  way  ;  I 
would  have  you  meet  them  within  the  same  day  at  the  aforesaid  place. 
That  by  the  weight  of  your  authority,  and  the  prudence  and  unanimity 
of  the  rest  that  assemble,  this  dispute,  which  has  disgracefully  continued 
until  the  present  time,  in  consequence  of  certain  disgraceful  contentions, 
may  be  discussed,  by  hearing  all  that  shall  be  alleged  by  those  who  are 
now  at  variance,  whom  we  have  also  commanded  to  be  present,  and  thus 
the  controversy  be  reduced,  though  slowly,  to  that  faith,  and  observance 
of  religion,  and  fraternal  concord,  which  ought  to  prevail.  May 
Almighty  God  preserve  thee  in  safety  many  years."  u 

This  council  met  according  to  appointment,  August,  A.  D. 
314,  and  was  composed  of  the  bishops  from  almost  all  the 
provinces  of  the  Western  division  of  the  empire.  Sylvester, 
who  was  now  bishop  of  Rome,  was  summoned  to  the  council, 
but  declined  on  account  of  age,  sending  two  presbyters  and 
two  deacons  as  his  representatives  This  council  also 
declared  Caecilianus  innocent  of  the  crimes  laid  against 
him  by  the  Donatists.  The  council  also  decided  that  who- 
ever should  falsely  accuse  his  brethren  should  be  cut  off 
from  the  communion  of  the  church  without  hope  of  ever 
being  received  again,  except  at  the  point  of  death.  It 
further  decided  that  such  bishops  as  had  been  ordained  by 
the  Donatists  should  officiate  alternately  with  the  Catholic 
bishops  till  one  or  the  other  should  die. 


THE  DONATISTS  APPEAL    TO    THE  EMPEROR.      289 

But  the  council  did  not  stop  with  the  consideration  of 
the  question  which  it  was  summoned  to  consider.  The 
bishops  in  council  now  took  it  upon  themselves  to  legislate 
in  matters  of  discipline  for  the  world,  and  to  bestow  special 
preference  and  dignity  upon  the  bishop  of  Rome.  They 
"  ordained  that  Easter  should  be  kept  on  the  same  day,  and 
on  a  Sunday,  by  all  the  churches  in  the  world"  (Bower™}, 
and  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  should  announce  to  the  churches 
the  particular  Sunday  upon  which  it  should  be  celebrated. 
Before  adjourning,  the  council  sent  to  the  bishop  of  Rome 
an  account  of  their  proceedings,  with  a  copy  of  the  decrees 
which  they  had  adopted  concerning  the  discipline  of  the 
churches,  that  he  might  publish  them  to  all  the  churches. 

The  Donatists  appealed  again,  not  for  council,  but  to  the 
emperor  himself.  Constantino  held  a  consistory  and  heard 
their  appeal,  and  in  harmony  with  the  council  already  held, 
pronounced  in  favor  of  Csecilianus  and  against  the  Donatists. 
Upon  this  the  Donatists  claimed  that  the  emperor  had  been 
influenced  by  Hosius,  one  of  his  favorite  bishops,  and  denied 
that  he  had  any  jurisdiction  in  the  matter  at  all,  because  it 
was  not  right  for  civil  magistrates  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  religion  !  This  claim  was  true  enough,  if  they  had 
made  it  at  the  beginning,  and  had  refused  from  the  first  to 
allow  their  controversy  to  be  touched  upon  in  any  way  by 
the  imperial  authority.  Then  they  would  have  stood  upon 
proper  ground  ;  but  when  they  themselves  were  the  first  to 
appeal  to  the  civil  authority  ;  when  they  had  asked  the  em- 
peror to  consider  the  matter  again  and  again,  with  the  hope 
of  getting  the  imperial  power  on  their  side  ;  and  when 
they  had  carried  to  the  last  extreme,  their  efforts  in  this 
direction, —  when  they  had  done  all  this  in  vain,  and  then 
turned  about  to  protest,  their  protest  was  robbed  of  every 
shadow  of  force  or  merit. 

The  question  as  to  which  was  the  Catholic  Church  having 
now  been  decided,  Constantine,  in  his  next  epistle,  could  add 

w  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Sylvester,  par.  I,  note  A. 


290  THE   UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

yet  another  distinguishing  title.  As  we  have  seen,  the  Edict 
of  Milan  —  March,  A.  D.  313  —  ordered  that  the  churches 
should  be  restored  to  the  Christians — "the  whole  body 
of  Christians"  —without  distinction.  When  the  Catholic 
Church  asserted  its  sole  right  to  the  designation  "  Chris- 
tian," and  backed  its  assertion  with  political  reasons  which 
were  then  peculiarly  cogent,  the  imperial  epistle  ran — March, 
A.  D.  313 — "to  the  Catholic  Church  of  the  Christians." 
When  the  emperor  wrote  to  Melchiades  appointing  the  first 
council  under  the  imperial  authority,  his  epistle  ran  — 
autumn,  A.  D.  313  —  the  holy  Catholic  Church."  When  he 
wrote  to  Chrestus  —  summer,  A.  D.  314 — summoning  him 
to  the  second  council  under  imperial  authority,  he  referred 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  embodying  the 
"most  holy  religion."  When  it  had  been  decided  which 
was  "  the  most  holy  Catholic  religion,"  he  addressed  an 
epistle  to  Csecilianus —  A.  D.  316  —  announcing  imperial 
favors  to  "  the  legitimate  and  most  holy  Catholic  religion," 
and  empowered  Csecilianus  to  assist  the  imperial  officers  in 
preventing  any  diversion  from  the  most  holy  Catholic  Church. 
The  following  is  that  letter  :  - 

"  Constantine  Augustus,  to  Csecilianus,  bishop  of  Carthage  :  As  we 
have  determined,  that  in  all  the  provinces  of  Africa,  Numidia,  and 
Mauritania,  something  should  be  granted  to  certain  ministers  of  the  legiti- 
mate and  most  holy  Catholic  religion  to  defray  their  expenses,  I  have 
given  letters  to  Ursus,  the  most  illustrious  lieutenant-governor  of  Africa, 
and  have  communicated  to  him,  that  he  shall  provide,  to  pay  to  your  au- 
thority, three  thousand  folles  [about  one  hundred  thousand  dollars]. 

"After  you  shall  have  obtained  this  sum,  you  are  to  order  these 
monies  to  be  distributed  among  the  aforesaid  ministers,  according  to  the 
abstract  addressed  to  thee  from  Hosius.  But  if  thou  shalt  learn,  per- 
haps, that  anything  shall  be  wanting  to  complete  this  my  purpose  with 
regard  to  all,  thou  art  authorized,  without  delay,  to  make  demands  for 
whatever  thou  mayest  ascertain  to  be  necessary,  from  Heraclides,  the 
procurator  of  our  possessions.  And  I  have  also  commanded  him  when 
present,  that  if  thy  authority  should  demand  any  monies  of  him,  he 
should  see  that  it  should  be  paid  without  delay.  And  as  I  ascertained 
that  some  men,  who  are  of  no  settled  mind,  wished  to  divert  the  people 


THE  STATE  BECOMES  PARTISAN.  291 

from  the  most  holy  Catholic  Church,  by  a  certain  pernicious  adulteration, 
I  wish  thee  to  understand  that  I  have  given,  both  to  the  proconsul 
Anulinus  and  to  Patricius,  vicar-general  of  the  prefects,  when  present, 
the  following  injunctions  :  that,  among  all  the  rest,  they  should  particu- 
larly pay  the  necessary  attention  to  this,  nor  should  by  any  means  toler- 
ate that  this  should  be  overlooked.  Wherefore,  if  thou  seest  any  of  these 
men  persevering  in  this  madness,  thou  shalt,  without  any  hesitancy,  pro- 
ceed to  the  aforesaid  judges,  and  report  it  to  them,  that  they  may  ani- 
madvert upon  them,  as  I  commanded  them,  when  present.  May  the  power 
of  the  great  God  preserve  thee  many  years." 13 

When  the  Donatists  rejected  the  decision  of  the  emperor 
himself,  and  denied  his  right  to  say  anything  in  the  contro- 
versy in  which  they  had  invited  him  over  and  over  again  to 
participate,  as  announced  in  the  above  letter  to  Csecilianus  he 
carried  against  them  —  A.  D.  316  —  the  interference  which 
they  had  solicited,  to  the  full  extent  to  which  it  would  un- 
doubtedly have  been  carried  against  the  Catholics  if  the 
Donatists  had  secured  the  decision  in  their  favor.  The 
Donatist  bishops  were  driven  out,  and  Constantine  ordered 
all  their  churches  to  be  delivered  to  the  Catholic  party.  As 
this  was  done  hi  the  interests,  and  by  the  direct  counsel,  of 
the  Catholic  party  through  Hosius,  the  emperor's  chief  coun- 
sellor, the  imperial  authority  thus  became  wholly  partisan, 
and  to  both  parties  was  given  a  dignity  which  was  far,  far 
beyond  any  merit  that  was  in  the  question  at  issue.  To  the 
Catholic  party  it  gave  the  dignity  of  an  imperial  alliance  and 
the  assurance  of  imperial  favor.  The  Donatist  party  it  elevated 
to  a  dignity  and  clothed  with  an  importance  which  placed  it 
before  the  world  as  worthy  of  imperial  antagonism.  Into 
the  Catholic  party,  it  infused  more  than  ever  the  pride  of 
place,  power,  and  imperial  favor.  To  the  Donatist  party  it 
gave  the  dignity  and  fame  of  a  persecuted  people,  and  in- 
creased the  evil  which  it  attempted  to  destroy. 

More  than  this,  when  the  governmental  authority,  which 
should  be  for  the  protection  of  all  alike  from  violence,  be- 
came itself  a  party  to  the  controversy,  it  forsook  the  place  of 
impartial  protector,  and  assumed  the  place  of  a  partisan. 

13  Eusebius's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  x,  chap,  vj. 


292  THE   UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

This  only  deepened  the  sense  of  injury  felt  by  the  defeated, 
and  the  sense  of  triumph  felt  by  the  victorious,  party  ;  and 
the  antagonism  was  only  the  more  embittered.  "  The  im- 
placable faction  darkened  into  a  sanguinary  feud.  For  the 
first  time,  human  blood  was  shed  in  conflicts  between  fol- 
lowers of  the  Prince  of  peace."  - Milman.u  And  the  gov- 
ernment, by  becoming  a  partisan,  had  lost  the  power  to  keep 
the  peace.  By  becoming  a  party  to  religious  controversy,  it 
had  lost  the  power  to  prevent  civil  violence  between  religious 
factions.  "  Each  party  recriminated  on  the  other,  but 
neither  denies  the  barbarous  scenes  of  massacre  and  license 
which  devastated  the  African  cities.  The  Donatists  boasted 
of  their  martyrs,  and  the  cruelties  of  the  Catholic  party  rest 
on  their  own  admission  :  they  deny  not,  they  proudly  vindi- 
cate, their  barbarities  :  '  Is  the  vengeance  of  God  to  be  de- 
frauded of  its  victims  ? '  and  they  appeal  to  the  Old  Testament 
to  justify,  by  the  examples  of  Moses,  of  Phineas,  and  of 
Elijah,  the  Christian  duty  of  slaying  by  thousands  the 
renegades  and  unbelievers."  —Milman.15  This,  though  a 
shameful  perversion  of  Scripture,  was  but  the  practical  work- 
ing out  of  the  theocratical  theory  of  government,  which  was 
the  basis  of  the  whole  system  of  the  union  of  Church  and 
State  which  had  been  created  by  Constantine  and  the  bishops. 
Constantino  issued  an  edict  commanding  peace,  but  it 
was  all  in  vain.  The  tumult  went  on,  constantly  increasing 
in  violence,  until  the  only  alternative  was  for  the  imperial 
authority  either  to  enter  upon  the  horrors  of  a  protracted 
war  with  its  own  subjects,  or  openly  refuse  to  go  any  farther. 
The  latter  step  was  taken.  In  A.  D.  321,  upon  the  advice  of 
the  civil  officers  of  Africa,  Constantine  "repealed  the  laws 
against  the  Donatists,  and  gave  the  African  people  full  liberty 
to  follow  either  of  the  contending  parties,  as  they  liked 
best. " — Mosheim. 16 


u  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  5  from  the  end.  15  Id. 

16  "Ecclesiastical  History"  Century  iv,  book  ii,  part  ii,  chap,  v,  par.  5,  Mur- 
dpck's  translation. 


CLERGY  EXEMPT  FROM  PUBLIC  OFFICES.         293 

The  Donatist  controversy  touched  no  point  of  doctrine, 
but  of  discipline  only,  and  was  confined  to  the  provinces  of 
Africa.  The  result  in  this  case,  however,  ought  to  have 
convinced  Constantine  that  the  best  thing  for  the  imperial 
authority  to  do  was  to  return,  and  strictly  adhere,  to  the 
principles  of  the  Edict  of  Milan,  to  let  religious  questions 
and  controversies  entirely  alone,  and  allow  each  indi- 
vidual "the  privilege  of  choosing  and  professing  his  own 
religion."  Yet,  even  if  this  thought  had  occurred  to  him, 
it  would  have  been  impossible  for  him  to  do  so  and  attain 
the  object  of  his  ambition.  The  principles  of  the  Edict  of 
Milan  had  no  place  in  the  compact  entered  into  between 
Constantine  and  the  bishops.  As  yet  he  possessed  only  half 
the  empire  ;  for  Licinius  still  held  the  East,  and  Constan- 
tine's  position  was  not  yet  so  secure  that  he  dare  risk  any 
break  with  the  bishops.  He  had  bargained  to  them  his  influ- 
ence in  religious  things  for  theirs  in  politics.  The  contract 
had  been  entered  into,  fie  had  s'old  himself  to  the  church 
influence,  and  he  could  not  go  back  even  if  he  would.  The 
empire  was  before  him,  but  without  the  support  of  the  church 
party  it  could  not  be  his. 

It  is  necessary  now  to  notice  the  material  point  in  that 
edict  issued  in  A.  D.  313,  exempting  from  all  public  offices 
the  clergy  of  the  Catholic  Church.  As  a  benefit  to  society 
and  that ' '  the  greatest  good  might  be  conferred  on  the  State, " 
the  clergy  of  the  Catholic  Church  were  to  "be  held  totally 
free  and  exempt  from  all  public  offices." 

At  this  time  the  burdens  and  expenses  of  the  principal 
offices  of  the  State  were  so  great  that  this  exemption  was  of 
the  greatest  material  benefit.  The  immediate  effect  of  the 
edict,  therefore,  was  to  erect  the  clerical  order  into  a  distinct 
and  privileged  class.  For  instance,  in  the  days  of  the  sys- 
tematic governing  of  the  empire,  the  decurionate  was  the 
chief  office  of  the  State.  "  The  decurions  formed  the  Sen- 
ates of  the  towns  ;  they  supplied  the  magistrates  from  their 
body,  arid  had  the  right  of  electing  them.  Under  the  new 


294  THE   UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

financial  system  introduced  by  Diocletian,  the  decurions 
were  made  responsible  for  the  full  amount  of  taxation  im- 
posed by  the  cataster,  or  assessment  on  the  town  and  dis- 
trict. "  —  Milman. " 

As  the  splendor  and  magnificence  of  the  court  display 
was  increased,  and  as  the  imperial  power  became  more 
absolute,  the  taxation  became  more  and  more  burdensome. 
To  such  an  extent  indeed  was  this  carried  that  tenants, 
and  indeed  proprietors  of  moderate  means,  were  well-nigh 
bankrupted.  Yet  the  imperial  power  demanded  of  the  decu- 
rions the  full  amount  of  the  taxes  that  were  levied  in  their 
town  or  district.  "The  office  itself  grew  into  disrepute, 
and  the  law  was  obliged  to  force  that  upon  the  reluctant 
citizen  of  wealth  or  character  which  had  before  been  an 
object  of  eager  emulation  and  competition."  —  Milman.1* 

The  exemption  of  the  clerical  order  from  all  public  of- 
fices opened  the  way  for  all  who  wpuld  escape  these  burdens, 
to  become,  by  whatever  means  possible,  members  of  .that 
order.  The  effect  was,  therefore,  to  bring  into  the  ministry 
of  the  church  a  crowd  of  men  who  had  no  other  purpose  in 
view  than  to  be  relieved  from  the  burdensome  duties  that 
were  laid  upon  the  public  by  the  imperial  extravagance  of 
Constantine.  So  promptly  did  this  consequence  follow  from 
this  edict,  and  "  such  numbers  of  persons,  in  order  to  secure 
this  exemption,  rushed  into  the  clerical  order,"  that  "this 
manifest  abuse  demanded  an  immediate  modification  of  the 
law."  It  was  therefore  ordered  that  "  none  were  to  be  ad- 
mitted into  the  sacred  order  except  on  the  vacancy  of  a  relig- 
ious charge,  and  then  those  only  whose  poverty  exempted 
them  from  the  municipal  functions"  —  Milman.19 

Nor  was  this  all.  The  order  of  the  clergy  itself  found 
that  it  was  required  to  pay  for  this  exemption  a  tribute  which 
it  had  not  at  all  contemplated  in  the  original  bargain.  Those 
already  belonging  to  the  clerical  order  who  were  sufficiently 

17  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ii,  par.  2,  3. 

18  Id.,  par.  3.  ™  Id, 


FRUITS   OF   THE  EXEMPTION.  295 

wealthy  to  exercise  the  office  of  decurion,  were  commanded 
to  ' '  abandon  their  religious  profession  "  (Milman 20 ),  in  order 
that  they  might  fill  the  office  which  had  been  deserted  by  the 
exemption  which  had  been  granted  to  their  particular  order. 
This  of  course  was  counted  by  the  clergy  as  a  great  hardship. 
But  as  they  had  willingly  consented  at  the  first  to  the  inter- 
ference of  the  authority  of  the  State  when  it  was  exercised 
seemingly  to  their  profit,  they  had  thereby  forfeited  their 
right  to  protest  against  that  same  interference  when  it  was 
exercised  actually  to  the  denial  of  their  natural  rights.  Yet 
the  resources  of  dishonest  intrigue  were  still  left  to  them, 
—  especially  the  plea  that  their  possessions  belonged  not  to 
themselves  but  to  the  church, —  and  it  was  exercised  to  such 
an  extent  as  virtually  to  defeat  the  purpose  of  this  later  law. 
Thus  the  evil  consequences  of  the  original  law  still  flowed 
on,  and  "numbers,  without  any  inward  call  to  the  spiritual 
office,  and  without  any  fitness  for  it  whatever,  now  got  them- 
selves ordained  as  ecclesiastics,  for  the  sake  of  enjoying  this 
exemption,  whereby  many  of  the  worst  class  came  to  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  most  sacred  calling."  —JVeander.21 

Another  scheme  adopted  by  Constantino,  was  fraught  with 
more  evil  in  the  same  direction.  As  he  had  favored  the  new 
religion  only  on  account  of  its  value  to  him  as  a  political  factor, 
he  counted  it  to  his  advantage  to  have  as  many  as  possible  to 
profess  that  religion.  He  therefore  used  all  the  means  that 
could  be  employed  by  the  State  to  effect  this  purpose.  He 
made  the  principal  positions  about  his  palace  and  court,  a 
gift  and  reward  to  the  professors  of  the  new  imperial  religion, 
and  with  "  the  hopes  of  wealth  and  honors,  the  example  of 
an  emperor,  his  exhortations,  his  irresistible  smiles,  diffused 
conviction  among  the  venal  and  obsequious  crowds  which 
usually  fill  the  apartments  of  a  palace.  .  .  .  As  the  lower 
ranks  of  society  are  governed  by  imitation,  the  conversion  of 

20  Id. 

21  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  11. 

25 


296  THE    UNION  OF   CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

those  who  possessed  any  eminence  of  birth,  of  power,  or  of 
riches,  was  soon  followed  by  dependent  multitudes.  The 
salvation  of  the  common  people  was  purchased  at  an  easy 
rate,  if  it  be  true  that,  in  one  year,  twelve  thousand  men 
were  baptized  at  Rome,  besides  a  proportionable  number  of 
women  and  children,  and  that  a  white  garment,  with  twenty 
pieces  of  gold,  had  been  promised  by  the  emperor  to  every 
convert."  -  Gibbon.™ 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  statement  Gibbon  inserts 
the  cautious  clause,  "if  it  be  true,"  but  such  a  precaution 
was  scarcely  necessary ;  because  the  whole  history  of  the 
times  bears  witness  that  such  was  the  system  followed, 
whether  this  particular  instance  was  a  fact  or  not.  This  is 
proved  by  the  next  instance  which  we  shall  mention  of  Con- 
stantine's  efforts  in  gaining  converts  to  the  new  religion. 
He  wrote  letters  offering  rewards  both  political  and  financial 
to  those  cities  which,  as  such,  would  forsake  the  heathen 
religion,  and  destroy  or  allow  to  be  destroyed  their  heathen 
temples.  "The  cities  which  signalized  a  forward  zeal,  by 
the  voluntary  destruction  of  their  temples,  were  distinguished 
by  municipal  privileges,  and  rewarded  with  popular  dona- 
tives."- -  Gibbon.™ 

In  cities  that  would  accept  this  offer,  he  would  build 
churches  at  the  public  expense,  and  send  there  "a  complete 
body  of  the  clergy  arid  a  bishop"  when  "there  were  as  yet 
no  Christians  in  the  place."  Also  upon  such  churches  he 
bestowed  "large  sums  for  the  support  of  the  poor;  so  that 
the  conversion  of  the  heathen  might  be  promoted  by  doing 
good  to  their  bodies." •  —  Neander.zi  And  that  this  was 
simply  the  manifestation  of  his  constant  policy,  is  shown  by 
the  fact  that  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  in  giving  instruction  to 
the  bishops  as  to  how  they  should  conduct  themselves,  he 
said  :  — 


22  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xx,  par.  18.  23Id. 

24 "History  of  the  Christian  Keligion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First,  part 
j,  A,  par.  38. 


THE   CHURCU  OF   THE  MASSES.  297 

"  In  all  ways  unbelievers  must  be  saved.  It  is  not  every  one  who 
will  be  converted  by  learning  and  reasoning.  Some  join  us  from  desire 
of  maintenance  ;  some  for  preferment  ;  some  for  presents  :  nothing  is  so 
rare  as  a  real  lover  of  truth,  We  must  be  like  physicians,  and  accommo" 
date  our  medicines  to  the  diseases,  our  teaching  to  the  different  minds  of 
all."25 

He  further  enacted  "that  money  should  be  given  in  every 
city  to  orphans  and  widows,  and  to  those  who  were  conse- 
crated to  the  divine  service  ;  and  he  fixed  the  amount  of 
their  annual  allowance  [of  provisions]  more  according  to  the 
impulse  of  his  own  generosity,  than  to  the  exigencies  of 
their  condition."-  -  Theodoret.™  In  view  of  these  things  it 
is  evident  that  there  is  nothing  at  all  extravagant  in  the  state- 
ment that  in  a  single  year  twelve  thousand  men,  besides 
women  and  children,  were  baptized  in  Rome. 

In  addition  to  all  this,  he  exempted  all  church  property 
from  taxation,  which  exemption,  in  the  course  of  time,  the 
church  asserted  as  of  divine  right  ;  and  the  example  there 
set  is  followed  to  this  day,  even  among  people  who  profess 
a  separation  of  Church  and  State. 

The  only  result  which  could  possibly  come  from  such 
proceedings  as  these,  was,  First,  the  great  mass  of  the 
people,  of  the  pagans,  in  the  empire,  with  no  change  either 
of  character  or  convictions,  were  drawn  into  the  Catholic 
Church.  Thus  the  State  and  the  Church  became  one  and  the 
same  thing  ;  and  that  one  thing  was  simply  the  embodiment 
of  the  second  result ;  namely,  a  solid  mass  of  hypocrisy. 
"The  vast  numbers  who,  from  external  considerations, 
without  any  inward  call,  joined  themselves  to  the  Christian 
communities,  served  to  introduce  into  the  church  all  the 
corruptions  of  the  heathen  world.  Pagan  vices,  pagan 
delusions,  pagan  superstition,  took  the  garb  and  name  of 
Christianity,  and  were  thus  enabled  to  exert  a  more  corrupt- 
ing influence  on  the  Christian  life.  Such  were  those  who, 


25  Stanley,  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  v,  par.  13  from  the  end. 
^"Ecclesiastical  History,"  hook  1,  chap.  xi. 


298  THE    UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

without  any  real  interest  whatever  in  the  concerns  of  re-. 
ligion,  living  half  in  paganism  and  half  in  an  outward  show 
of  Christianity,  composed  the  crowds  that  thronged  the 
churches  on  the  festivals  of  the  Christians,  and  the  theaters 
on  the  festivals  of  the  pagans.  Such  were  those  who 
accounted  themselves  Christians,  if  they  but  attended  church 
once  or  twice  in  a  year ;  while,  without  a  thought  of  any 
higher  life,  they  abandoned  themselves  to  every  species  of 
worldly  pursuit  and  pleasure."  —  Neander*1 

It  could  not  be  otherwise.  The  course  pursued  by  Con- 
stantine  in  conformity  with  the  political  intrigues  of  the 
bishops,  drew  into  the  Catholic  Church  every  hypocrite  in 
the  Roman  empire.  And  this  for  the  simple  reason  that  it 
could  draw  no  other  kind  ;  because  no  man  of  principle,  even 
though  he  were  an  outright  pagan,  would  allow  himself  to  be 
won  by  any  such  means.  It  was  only  to  spread  throughout 
all  the  empire  the  ambiguous  mixture  of  paganism  and 
apostate  Christianity  which  we  have  seen  so  thoroughly  ex- 
emplified in  the  life  of  Constantine  himself,  who  was  further 
inspired  and  flattered  by  the  ambitious  bishops. 

There  were  some  honest  pagans  who  refused  all  the  im- 
perial bribes  and  kept  aloof  from  the  wicked  system  thereby 
established.  There  were  some  genuine  Christians  who  not 
only  kept  aloof  from  the  foul  mass,  but  protested  against 
every  step  that  was  taken  in  creating  it.  But  speaking 
generally,  the  whole  population  of  the  empire  was  in- 
cluded in  the  system  thus  established.  "By  taking  in 
the  whole  population  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  church 
became,  indeed,  a  church  of  the  masses,  a  church  of  the 
people,  but  at  the  same  time  more  or  less  a  church  of 
the  world.  Christianity  became  a  matter  of  fashion.  The 
number  of  hypocrites  and  formal  professors  rapidly  in- 
creased ;  strict  discipline,  zeal,  self-sacrifice,  and  brotherly 
love  proportionally  ebbed  away  ;  and  many  heathen  customs 

""History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Third, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  1. 


THE  CHURCH  A   MASS   OF  HYPOCRITES.  299 

and  usages,  under  altered  names,  crept  into  the  worship  of 
God  and  the  life  of  the  Christian  people.  The  Roman  State 
had  grown  up  under  the  influence  of  idolatry,  and  was  not  to 
be  magically  transformed  at  a  stroke.  With  the  secularizing 
process,  therefore,  a  paganizing  tendency  went  hand  in  hand." 
—  Schaff.™ 

The  effect  of  all  this  was  further  detrimental  to  true 
Christianity  in  that  it  argued  that  Christianity  consists  in 
the  mere  profession  of  the  name,  pertaining  not  to  the 
essential  character,  nor  implying  any  material  change  in  the 
general  conduct.  Consequently,  those  who  had  been  by 
this  means  brought  into  the  church  acted  worse,  and  really 
were  worse,  than  those  who  remained  aloof.  When  the 
bishops  or  clergy  of  the  church  undertook  to  exhort  the 
heathen  to  become  Christians,  the  pagans  pointed  to  the  hyp- 
ocritical professors  who  were  already  members  of  the  church, 
and  replied  to  the  invitation  with  such  arguments  as 
these  :  "  'We  lead  good  lives  already  :  what  need  have  we 
of  Christ  ?  We  commit  no  murder,  theft,  nor  robbery  ;  we 
covet  no  man's  possessions  ;  we  are  guilty  of  no  breach  of 
the  matrimonial  bond.  Let  something  worthy  of  censure  be 
found  in  our  lives,  and  whoever  can  point  it  out  may  make 
us  Christians.'  Comparing  himself  with  nominal  Christians  : 
'  Why  would  you  persuade  me  to  become  a  Christian  ?  I 
have  been  defrauded  by  a  Christian,  I  never  defrauded  any 
man ;  a  Christian  has  broken  his  oath  to  me,  and  I  never 
broke  my  word  to  any  man.' '  —Neander.™ 

Not  only  was  the  church  thus  rendered  powerless  to  in- 
fluence those  who  were  without,  but  she  was  likewise  power- 
less to  influence  for  any  good  those  who  were  within.  When 
the  vast  majority  in  the  church  were  unconverted  and  had 
joined  the  church  from  worldly  and  selfish  motives,  liv- 
ing only  lives  of  conscious  hypocrisy,  it  was  impossible 

28 "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  g  22,  par.  2. 
29  "  History  of   the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First, 
part  i,  div.  C,  par.  1. 


THE   UNION  OF   CHURCH  AND   STATE. 

that   church    discipline    should   be   enforced  by  church  au- 
thority. 

The  next  step  taken  by  the  bishopric,  therefore,  was  to 
secure  edicts  under  which  they  could  enforce  church  disci- 
pline. This,  too,  not  only  upon  the  members  of  the  church, 
but  likewise  upon  those  who  were  not.  The  church  having, 
out  of  lust  for  worldly  power  and  influence,  forsaken  the 
power  of  God,  the  civil  power  was  the  only  resource  that 
remained  to  her.  Conscious  of  her  loss  of  moral  power,  she 
seized  upon  the  civil.  The  account  of  this  further  wicked- 
ness will  be  given  in  the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


THE   ORIGINAL    SUNDAY    LEGISLATION. 

THE  church  was  fully  conscious  of  her  loss  of  the  power 
of  God  before  she  sought  the  power  of  the  State.  Had 
she  not  been,  she  never  would  have  made  any  overtures  to 
the  imperial  authority,  nor  have  received  with  favor  any  from 
it.  There  is  a  power  that  belongs  with  the  gospel  of  Christ, 
and  is  inseparable  from  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  that  is  the 
power  of  God.  In  fact,  the  gospel  is  but  the  manifestation 
of  that  power,  for  the  gospel  "is  the  power  of  God  unto 
salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth."  Rom.  i,  16.  As 
long,  therefore,  as  any  order  or  organization  of  people  pro- 
fessing the  gospel  of  Christ  maintains  the  principle  of  that 
gospel  in  sincerity,  so  long  the  power  of  God  will  be  with 
them,  and  they  will  have  no  need  of  any  other  power  to 
make  their  influence  felt  for  good  wherever  known.  But 
just  as  soon  as  any  person  or  association  professing  the 
gospel  loses  the  spirit  of  it,  so  soon  the  power  is  gone  also. 
Then,  and  only  then,  docs  such  an  organization  seek  for 
another  kind  of  power  to  supply  the  place  of  that  which  is 
lost. 

Thus -was  it  with  the  church  at  this  time.  She  had 
fallen,  deplorably  fallen,  from  the  purity  and  the  truth,  and 
therefore  from  the  power,  of  the  gospel.  And  having  lost 
the  power  of  God  and  of  godliness,  she  greedily  grasped  for 
the  power  of  the  State  and  of  ungodliness.  And  to  secure 
laws  by  which  she  might  enforce  her  discipline  and  dogmas 
upon  those  whom  she  had  lost  the  power  either  to  convince 

[301] 


302  THE   ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

or  to  persuade,  \vas  the  definite  purpose  which  the  bishopric 
had  in  view  when  it  struck  tlmt  bargain  with  Constantine, 
and  lent  him  the  influence  of  the  church  in  his  imperial 
aspirations. 

In  the  chapter  on  "Constantine  and  the  Bishops,"  evi- 
dence has  been  given  which  shows  how  diligently  the  bishops 
endeavored  to  convince  themselves  that  in  the  theocracy 
which  they  had  framed  and  of  which  they  were  now  a  part, 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  come.  But  they  did  not  suppose 
for  a  moment  that  the  Lord  himself  would  come  and  conduct 
the  affairs  of  this  kingdom  in  person.  They  themselves  were 
to  be  the  representatives  of  God  upon  the  earth,  and  the  the- 
ocracy thus  established  was  to  be  ruled  by  the  Lord  through 
them.  This  was  but  the  culmination  of  the  evil  spirit  mani- 
fested in  the  self-exaltation  of  the  bishopric.  That  is  to  say, 
their  idea  of  a  theocracy  was  utterly  false,  and  the  working 
out  of  the  theory  was  but  the  manifestation  of  the  mystery 
of  iniquity. 

Yet  this  is  not  to  say  that  all  ideas  of  a  theocracy  have 
always  been  false.  The  government  of  Israel  was  a  true 
theocracy.  That  was  really  a  government  of  God.  At  the 
burning  bush,  God  commissioned  Moses  to  lead  his  people 
out  of  Egypt.  By  signs  and  wonders  and  mighty  miracles 
multiplied,  God  delivered  Israel  from  Egypt,  led  .them 
through  the  Red  Sea,  and  through  the  wilderness,  and 
finally  into  the  promised  land.  There  he  ruled  them  by 
judges,  to  whom  "in  divers  manners"  he  revealed  his 
will,  "  until  Samuel  the  prophet." 

In  the  days  of  Samuel,  the  people  asked  that  they  might 
have  a  king.  Their  request  was  granted,  but  only  under  the 
following  earnest  protest :  "And  the  Lord  said  unto  Samuel, 
Hearken  unto  the  voice  of  the  people  in  all  that  they  say 
unto  thee  :  for  they  have  not  rejected  thee,  but  they  have 
rejected  me,  that  I  should  not  reign  over  them.  According 
to  all  the  works  which  they  have  done  since  the  day  that  I 
brought  them  up  out  of  Egypt  even  unto  this  day,  wherewith 


ISRAEL  REJECTS   THE  LORD  AS  KINO.  303 

they  have  forsaken  me,  and  served  other  gods,  so  do  they 
also  unto  thee.  Now  therefore  hearken  unto  their  voice  : 
howbeit  yet  protest  solemnly  unto  them,  and  show  them  the 
manner  of  the  king  that  shall  reign  over  them. 

"And  Samuel  told  all  the  words  of  the  Lord  unto  the 
people  that  asked  of  him  a  king.  And  he  said,  This  will  be 
the  manner  of  the  king  that  shall  reign  over  you  :  He  will 
take  your  sons,  and  appoint  them  for  himself,  for  his  char- 
iots, and  to  be  his  horsemen  ;  and  some  shall  run  before  his 
chariots,  and  he  will  appoint  him  captains  over  thousands, 
and  captains  over  fifties  ;  and  will  set  them  to  ear  his 
ground,  and  to  reap  his  harvest,  and  to  make  his  instru- 
ments of  war,  and  instruments  of  his  chariots.  And  he  will 
take  your  daughters  to  be  confectionaries,  and  to  be  cooks, 
and  to  be  bakers.  And  he  will  take  your  fields,  and  your 
vineyards,  and  your  oliveyards,  even  the  best  f  them,  and 
give  them  to  his  servants.  And  he  will  take  the  tenth  of 
your  seed,  and  of  your  vineyards,  and  give  to  his  officers, 
and  to  his  servants.  And  he  will  take  your  menservants, 
and  your  maidservants,  and  your  goodliest  young  men,  and 
your  asses,  and  put  them  to  his  work.  He  will  take  the 
tenth  of  your  sheep  :  and  ye  shall  be  his  servants.  And  ye 
shall  cry  out  in  that  day  because  of  your  king  which  ye 
shall  have  chosen  you  ;  and  the  Lord  will  not  hear  you  in 
that  day. 

"Nevertheless  the  people  refused  to  obey  the  voice  of 
Samuel ;  and  they  said,  Nay  ;  but  we  will  have  a  king  over 
us  ;  that  we  also  may  be  like  all  the  nations  ;  and  that  our 
king  may  judge  us,  and  go  out  before  us,  and  fight  our  bat- 
tles. And  Samuel  heard  all  the  words  of  the  people,  and 
he  rehearsed  them  in  the  ears  of  the  Lord.  And  the  Lord 
said  to  Samuel,  Hearken  unto  their  voice,  and  make  them  a 
king.  And  Samuel  said  unto  the  men  of  Israel,  Go  ye  every 
man  unto  his  city. " 

God  chose  Saul,  and  Samuel  anointed  him  king  over 
Israel.  "And  Samuel  said  unto  all  Israel,  Behold,  I  have 


304  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

hearkened  unto  your  voice  in  all  that  ye  said  unto  me,  and 
have  made  a  king  over  you.  And  now,  behold,  the  king 
walketh  before  you :  and  I  am  old  and  gray-headed ;  and, 
behold,  my  sons  are  with  you  :  and  I  have  walked  before  you 
from  my  childhood  unto  this  day.  Behold,  here  I  am : 
witness  against  me  before  the  Lord,  and  before  his 
anointed  :  whose  ox  have  I  taken  ?  or  whose  ass  have  I 
taken  ?  or  whom  have  I  defrauded  ?  whom  have  I  op- 
pressed? or  of  whose  hand  have  I  received  any  bribe  to 
blind  mine  eyes  therewith?  and  I  will  restore  it  to  you. 
And  they  said,  Thou  hast  not  defrauded  us,  nor  oppressed 
us,  neither  hast  thou  taken  ought  of  any  man's  hand.  And 
he  said  unto  them,  The  Lord  is  witness  against  you,  and  his 
anointed  is  witness  this  day,  that  ye  have  not  found  ought 
in  my  hand.  And  they  answered,  He  is  witness. 

"And  Samuel  said  unto  the  people,  It  is  the  Lord  that 
advanced  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  that  brought  your  fathers 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt.  Now  therefore  stand  still, 
that  I  may  reason  with  you  before  the  Lord  of  all  the  right- 
eous acts  of  the  Lord,  which  he  did  to  you  and  to  your 
fathers.  When  Jacob  was  come  into  Egypt,  and  your 
fathers  cried  unto  the  Lord,  then  the  Lord  sent  Moses  and 
Aaron,  which  brought  forth  your  fathers  out  of  Egypt,  and 
made  them  dwell  in  this  place.  And  when  they  forgot  the 
Lord  their  God,  he  sold  them  into  the  hands  of  Sisera,  cap- 
tain of  the  host  of  Razor,  and  into  the  hand  of  the  Philis- 
tines, and  into  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Moab,  and  they 
fought  against  them.  And  they  cried  unto  the  Lord,  and 
said,  We  have  sinned,  because  we  have  forsaken  the  Lord, 
and  have  served  Baalim  and  Ashtaroth  :  but  now  deliver  us 
out  of  the  hand  of  our  enemies,  and  we  will  serve  thee. 
And  the  Lord  sent  Jerubbaal,  and  Bedan,  and  Jephthah, 
and  Samuel,  and  delivered  you  out  of  the  hand  of  your 
enemies  on  every  side,  and  ye  dwelt  safe.  And  when  ye 
saw  that  Nahash  the  king  of  the  children  of  Ammon  came 
against  you,  ye  said  unto  me,  Nay  ;  but  a  king  shall  reign 


THE  LORD  WOULD  NOT  FORSAKE  THE  PEOPLE.  305 

over  us  :  when  the  Lord  your  God  was  your  king.  Now 
therefore,  behold  the  king  whom  ye  have  chosen,  and  whom 
ye  have  desired  ;  and,  behold,  the  Lord  hath  set  a  king  over 
you.  If  ye  will  fear  the  Lord,  and  serve  him,  and  obey  his 
voice,  and  not  rebel  against  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  ; 
then  shall  both  ye  and  also  the  king  that  reigneth  over  you 
continue  following  the  Lord  your  God  :  but  if  ye  will  not 
obey  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  but  rebel  against  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord,  then  shall  the  hand  of  the  Lord  be  against 
you,  as  it  was  against  your  fathers. 

"Now  therefore  stand  and  see  this  great  thing,  which 
the  Lord  will  do  before  your  eyes.  Is  it  not  wheat  harvest 
to-day  ?  I  will  call  unto  the  Lord,  and  he  shall  send  thunder 
and  rain  ;  that  ye  may  perceive  and  see  that  your  wicked- 
ness is  great,  which  ye  have  done  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, 
in  asking  you  a  king.  So  Samuel  called  unto  the  Lord ; 
and  the  Lord  sent  thunder  and  rain  that  day  :  and  all  the 
people  greatly  feared  the  Lord  and  Samuel.  And  all  the  peo- 
ple said  unto  Samuel,  Pray  for  thy  servants  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God,  that  we  die  not :  for  we  have  added  unto  all  our 
sins  this  evil,  to  ask  us  a  king. 

"And  Samuel  said  unto  the  people,  Fear  not  :  ye  have 
done  all  this  wickedness  :  yet  turn  not  aside  from  following 
the  Lord,  but  serve  the  Lord  with  all  your  heart ;  and  turn 
ye  not  aside ;  for  then  should  ye  go  after  vain  things,  which 
cannot  profit  nor  deliver  ;  for  they  are  vain.  For-  the  Lord 
will  not  forsake  his  people  for  his  great  name's  sake  :  be- 
cause it  hath  pleased  the  Lord  to  make  you  his  people. 
Moreover  as  for  me,  God  forbid  that  I  should  sin  against 
the  Lord  in  ceasing  to  pray  for  you  :  but  I  will  teach  you 
the  good  and  the  right  way  :  only  fear  the  Lord,  and  serve 
him  in  truth  with  all  your  heart :  for  consider  how  great 
things  he  hath  done  for  you.  But  if  ye  shall  still  do  wick- 
edly, ye  shall  be  consumed,  both  ye  and  your  king." 
1  Sam.,  chaps,  viii,  xii. 

Although  the  people  were  allowed  to  have  a  king,  and 


306  ME  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

although  in  this  movement  they  had  virtually  rejected  the 
Lord,  as  Samuel  told  them,  the  Lord  would  not  forsake 
them.  He  still  continued  to  guide  the  nation,  communicat- 
ing his  will  by  prophets  ;  and  although  they  had  done  wrong 
in  demanding  a  king,  the  Lord  made  even  the  kingship  to  be 
an  additional  element  in  teaching  them  his  eternal  purpose  ; 
he  made  it  to  them  a  reminder  of  the  eternal  kingdom  which 
he  would  establish  in  the  accomplishment  of  his  purpose 
concerning  the  earth. 

Saul  failed  to  do  the  will  of  God,  and  as  he  rejected  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  the  Lord  rejected  him  from  being  king, 
and  sent  Samuel  to  anoint  David  king  over  Israel ;  and 
David's  house,  and  David's  throne,  God  established  for 
evermore. 

When  Solomon  succeeded  to  the  kingdom  in  the  place  of 
David  his  father,  the  record  is  :  "Then  Solomon  sat  on  the 
throne  of  the  Lord  as  king  instead  of  David  his  father." 
1  Chron.  xxix,  23.  David's  throne  was  the  throne  of  the 
Lord,  and  Solomon  sat  on  the  throne  of  the  Lord  as  king 
over  -the  earthly  kingdom  of  God.  The  succession  to  the 
throne  descended  in  David's  line  to  Zedekiah,  who  was 
made  subject  to  the  king  of  Babylon,  that  perchance  the 
kingship  with  the  kingdom  might  stand.  Zedekiah  entered 
into  a  solemn  covenant  before  God  that  he  would  remain  a 
faithful  subject  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  His  name  was 
Mattaniah  at  first,  and  when  he  entered  into  this  covenant, 
the  king  of  Babylon  changed  his  name  to  Zedekiah,  which 
means  The  Justice  of  Jehovah.  Mattaniah  gave  his  hand, 
and  accepted  this  new  name  as  the  seal  of  the  covenant  with 
the  king  of  Babylon,  and  in  so  doing  pledged  that  if  he 
should  break  that  covenant,  he  would  incur  the  judgment  of 
the  Lord. 

Zedekiah  did  break  this  covenant,  upon  which  the 
Lord  said  :  "  As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord  God,  surely  in  the 
place  where  the  king  dwelleth  that  made  him  king,  whose 
oath  he  despised,  and  whose  covenant  he  brake,  even  with 


THE  KINGDOM  NOT  OF   THIS   WORLD.  307 

him  in  the  midst  of  Babylon  he  shall  die.  .  .  .  Seeing  he 
despised  the  oath  by  breaking  the  covenant,  when,  lo,  he 
had  given  his  hand,  and  hath  done  all  these  things,  he  shall 
not  escape.  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ;  As  I  live, 
surely  mine  oath  that  he  hath  despised,  and  my  covenant 
that  he  hath  broken,  even  it  will  I  recompense  upon  his  own 
head."  Eze.  xvii,  16-19.  And  in  recompensing  this  evil 
upon  the  head  of  Zedekiah,  the  word  of  Samuel  to  the  people 
was  fulfilled  when  he  told  them,  "If  ye  shall  still  do  wick- 
edly, ye  shall  be  consumed,  both  ye  and  your  king."  For 
to  Zedekiah,  and  to  the  kingdom  forever  after,  God  gave  this 
testimony  :  "Thou  profane,  wicked  prince  of  Israel,  whose 
day  is  come,  when  iniquity  shall  have  an  end,  thus  saith  the 
Lord  God  :  Remove  the  diadem,  and  take  off  the  crown  ; 
this  shall  not  be  the  same  ;  exalt  him  that  is  low,  and  abase 
him  that  is  high.  I  will  overturn,  overturn,  overturn  it ; 
mid  it  shall  l>e  no  more,  until  he  come  whose  right  it  is  j  and 
I  will  give  it  him"  Eze.  xxi,  25-27. 

The  kingdom  was  then  subject  to  Babylon.  When 
Babylon  fell,  and  Medo-Persia  succeeded,  it  was  overturned 
the  first  time.  When  Medo-Persia  fell,  and  was  succeeded 
by  Grecia,  it  was  overturned  the  second  time.  When  the 
Greek  empire  gave  way  to  Home,  it  was  overturned  the 
third  time.  And  then  says  the  word,  "It  shall  be  no  more, 
until  he  come  whose  right  it  is  ;  and  I  will  give  it  him." 
And  he  whose  right  it  is,  is  thus  named  :  "Thou  .  .  .  shalt 
call  his  name  Jesus.  He  shall  be  great,  and  shall  be  called 
the  Son  of  the  Highest  ;  and  the  Lord  God  shall  give  unto 
him  the  throne  of  his  father  David  ;  and  he  shall  reign  over 
the  house  of  Jacob  forever ;  and  of  his  kingdom  there  shall 
be  no  end."  Luke  i,  31-33. 

But  that  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,  nor  will  he  sit 
upon  that  throne  in  this  world.  While  Christ  was  here  as 
"  that  prophet,"  a  man  of  sorrows  and  acquainted  with  grief, 
he  refused  to  exercise  any  earthly  authority  or  office  what- 
ever. When  appealed  to,  to  mediate  in  a  dispute  between 


308  THE   ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

two  brothers  in  regard  to  their  inheritance,  he  replied, 
"Man,  who  made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over  you?" 
Luke  xii,  14.  And  when  the  people  would  have  taken  him 
and  made  him  a  king,  he  withdrew  himself  from  them,  and 
went  to  the  mountain  alone.  John  vi,  15.  The  last  night 
he  spent  on  earth  before  his  crucifixion,  and  in  the  last  talk 
with  Pilate  before  he  went  to  the  cross,  he  said,  "My 
kingdom  is  not  of  this  world."  John  xviii,  36.  Thus  the 
throne  of  the  Lord  has  been  removed  from  this  world,  and 
will  be  no  more  in  this  world  nor  of  this  world,  until,  as 
King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords,  he  whose  right  it  is  shall 
come  again.  And  that  time  is  the  end  of  this  world  and  the 
beginning  of  the  world  to  come.  This  is  shown  by  many 
scriptures,  some  of  which  it  will  be  in  order  here  to  quote. 

To  the  twelve  disciples  the  Saviour  said:  "I  appoint 
unto  you  a  kingdom,  as  my  Father  hath  appointed  unto  me  ; 
that  ye  may  eat  and  drink  at  my  table  in  my  kingdom,  and 
sit  on  thrones  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel."  Luke 
xxii,  29,  30.  As  to  when  this  shall  be,  we  are  informed  by 
the  word  in  Matthew  thus  :  "In  the  regeneration  when  the 
Son  of  man  shall  sit  in  the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall 
sit  upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel." 
Matt,  xix,  23.  And  the  time  when  he  shall  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  his  glory,  is  stated  by  another  passage  in  Matthew 
thus  :  "When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and 
all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne 
of  his  glory :  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations." 
Chap,  xxv,  31,  32.  By  these  scriptures  and  all  others  on 
the  subject,  it  is  evident  that  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  the 
kingdom  of  God,  is  not  only  not  of  this  world,  but  is  never- 
more to  be  of  this  world.  Therefore  while  this  world  stands, 
a  theocracy  can  never  be  in  it  again.  From  the  death  of 
Christ  until  now,  every  theory  of  an  earthly  theocracy  has 
been  a  false  theory.  And  from  now  until  the  end  of  the 
world,  every  such  theory  will  be  a  false  theory.  Yet  such 


THE  NEW  AND  FALSE   THEOCRACY.  3Q9 

was  the  theory  of  the  bishops  of  the  fourth  century  ;    and 
being  such,  it  was  utterly  false  and  wicked. 

The  falsity  of  this  theory  of  the  bishops  of  the  fourth 
century  has  been  clearly  seen  by  but  one  of  the  church  his- 
torians, that  is,  Neander.  And  this,  as  well  as  the  scheme 
which  the  bishops  had  in  mind,  has  been  better  described  by 
him  than  by  all  the  others  put  together.  The  design  of 
the  bishops  with  respect  to  the  civil  power  is  seen  in  the 
following  statement :  — 

"There  had  in  fact  arisen  in  the  church  ...  a  false  theocratical 
theory,  originating  not  in  the  essence  of  the  gospel,  but  in  the  confusion 
of  the  religious  constitutions  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  which 
.  .  .  brought  along  with  it  an  unchristian  opposition  of  the  spiritual  to 
the  secular  power,  and  which  might  easily  result  in  the  formation  of  a 
sacerdotal  State,  subordinating  the  secular  to  itself  in  a  false  and  outward 
way."  —  Neander.1 

That  which  they  had  in  mind  when  they  joined  their 
interests  to  Constantino's,  was  to  use  the  power  which 
through  him  they  would  thus  secure,  to  carry  into  effect  in 
the  State  and  by  governmental  authority  their  theocratical 
project.  The  State  was  not  only  to  be  subordinate  to  the 
church,  but  was  to  be  the  servant  of  the  church  to  assist  in 
bringing  all  the  world  into  the  new  kingdom  of  God.  The 
bishops  were  the  channel  through  which  the  will  of  God  was 
to  be  made  known  to  the  State.  Therefore  the  views  of  the 
bishops  were  to  be  to  the  government  the  expression  of  the 
will  of  God,  and  whatever  laws  the  bishopric  might  deem 
necessary  to  make  the  principles  of  their  theocracy  effective, 
it  was  their  purpose  to  secure.  This  also  has  been  well 
stated  by  the  same  excellent  authority  just  quoted,  as 
follows  :  — 

"  This  theocratical  theory  was  already  the  prevailing  one  in  the  time 
of  Constantine ;  and  .  .  .  the  bishops  voluntarily  made  themselves  de- 


1  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"   Vol  ii,   Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  2. 


310  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

pendent  on  him  by  their  disputes,  and  by  their  determination  to  make 
use  of  the  power  of  the  State  for  the  furtherance  of  their  aims."  — 
Neander* 

As  we  have  found  in  the  evidence  of  the  previous  chap- 
ter, the  church  had  become  filled  with  a  mass  of  people  who 
had  no  respect  for  religious  exercises,  and  now  it  became 
necessary  to  use  tne  power  of  the  State  to  assist  in  preserv- 
ing respect  for  church  discipline.  As  the  church-members 
had  not  religion  enough  to  lead  them  to  do  what  they  pro- 
fessed was  their  duty  to  do,  the  services  of  the  State  had  to 
be  enlisted  to  assist  them  in  doing  what  they '  professed 
to  believe  it  was  right  to  do.  In  other  words,  as  only 
worldly  and  selfish  interests  had  been  appealed  to  in  bring- 
ing them  to  membership  in  the  church,  and  as  they  therefore 
had  no  conscience  in  the  matter,  the  services  of  the  State 
were  employed  as  aids  to  conscience,  or  rather  to  supply  the 
lack  of  conscience. 

Accordingly,  one  of  the  first,  if  not  the  very  first,  of  the 
laws  secured  by  the  bishops  in  behalf  of  the  church,  was 
enacted,  as  it  is  supposed,  about  A.  D.  314,  ordering  that  on 
Friday  and  on  Sunday  ''there  should  be  a  suspension  of 
business  at  the  courts  and  in  other  civil  offices,  so  that  the 
day  might  be  devoted  with  less  interruption  to  the  purposes 
of  devotion."  —JVeander.3  To  justify  this,  the  specious  plea 
was  presented  that  when  the  courts  and  public  offices  were 
open  and  regularly  conducted  by  the  State  on  these  church 
days,  the  members  were  hindered  from  attending  to  their 
religious  exercises.  It  was  further  argued  that  if  the  State 
kept  its  offices  open,  and  conducted  the  public  business  on 
those  days,  as  the  church-members  could  not  conduct  the 
public  business  and  attend  to  church  services  both,  they 
could  not  well  hold  public  offices  ;  and  that,  therefore,  the 
State  was  in  fact  discriminating  against  the  church,  and  was 


2  "History  of  the  Christian  Religion,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Second,  part  i,  div.  i, 
par.  3. 

3/tf.,  Section  Third,  part  ii,  div.  iii,  par.  3. 


CONSTANTINE'S  SUNDAY-LAW.  3H 

hindering  rather  than  helping  the  progress  of  the  kingdom 
of  God. 

This  was  simply  to  confess  that  their  Christianity  was 
altogether  earthly,  sensual,  and  selfish.  It  was  to  confess 
that  there  was  not  enough  virtue  in  their  profession  of  re- 
ligion to  pay  them  for  professing  it ;  and  they  must  needs 
have  the  State  pay  them  for  professing  it.  This  was  in 
fact  in  harmony  with  the  whole  system  of  which  they  were  a 
part.  They  had  been  paid  by  the  State  in  the  first  place  to 
become  professors  of  the  new  religion,  and  it  was  but  con- 
sistent for  them  to  ask  the  State  to  continue  to  pay  them  for 
the  continued  profession  of  it.  This  was  consistent  with 
the  system  there  established  ;  but  it  was  totally  inconsistent 
with  every  idea  of  true  religion.  Any  religion  that  is  not  of 
sufficient  value  in  itself  to  pay  men  for  professing  it,  is  not 
worth  professing,  much  less  is  it  worth  supporting  by  the 
State.  In  genuine  Christianity  there  is  a  virtue  and  a  value 
which  make  it  of  more  worth  to  him  who  professes  it,  than 
all  that  the  whole  world  can  afford  —  yea,  of  more  worth 
than  life  itself. 

This,  however,  was  but  the  beginning.  The  State  had 
become  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  church,  and  she 
was  determined  to  use  it  for  all  it  was  worth.  As  we  have 
seen  by  many  proofs,  one  of  the  first  aims  of  the  apostate 
church  was  the  exaltation  of  Sunday  as  the  chief  sacred  day. 
And  no  sooner  had  the  Catholic  Church  made  herself  sure 
of  the  recognition  and  support  of  the  State,  than  she  secured 
from  the  emperor  an  edict  setting  apart  Sunday  especially  to 
the  purposes  of  devotion.  As  the  sun  was  the  chief  deity  of 
the  pagans,  and  as  the  forms  of  sun  worship  had  been  so 
fully  adopted  by  the  apostate  church,  it  was  an  easy  task  to 
secure  from  the  sun-loving  and  church-courting  Constantine, 
a  law  establishing  the  observance  of  the  day  of  the  sun 
as  a  holy  day.  Accordingly,  March  7,  A.  D.  321,  Con- 
stantine issued  his  famous  Sunday  edict,  which  reads  as 
follows  :  — 

26 


312  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

Constantine,  Emperor  Augustus,  to  Helpidius  :  On  the  venerable 
day  of  the  sun  let  the  magistrates  and  people  residing  in  cities  rest,  and 
let  all  workshops  be  closed.  In  the  country,  however,  persons  engaged 
in  agriculture  may  freely  and  lawfully  continue  their  pursuits  ;  because 
it  often  happens  that  another  day  is  not  so  suitable  for  grain-sowing  or 
for  vine-planting  ;  lest  by  neglecting  the  proper  moment  for  such  opera- 
tions, the  bounty  of  heaven  should  be  lost.  (Given  the  7th  day  of  March, 
Crispus  and  Constantine  being  consuls  each  of  them  for  the  second 
time. ) "  * 

Schaff  attempts  to  give  the  Sunday  legislation  of  Con- 
stantine a  "civil"  character  ;  but  this  is  not  only  an  error 
as  to  fact,  but  an  anachronism  by  fifteen  hundred  and  fifty 
years.  There  was  no  such  idea  in  the  conception  of  gov- 
ernment entertained  by  Constantine  and  the  bishops ;  nor 
was  there  any  place  for  any  such  idea  in  this  piece  of  legis- 
lation. The  whole  thing  was  religious.  This  is  seen  in  at 
least  five  distinct  counts. 

First  Count.  As  we  have  abundantly  shown,  the  theory 
of  government  intended  by  the  bishops  and  sanctioned  by 
Constantine,  was  a  theocracy  ;  that  is,  a  government  of  God, 
which,  in  itself,  could  be  nothing  else  than  religious.  We 
have  shown  that  the  bishops,  in  behalf  of  the  church,  played 
the  part  of  oppressed  Israel,  while  Maxentius  was  made  to 
occupy  the  place  of  a  second  Pharaoh,  and  Constantine  that 
of  a  new  Moses  delivering  Israel.  We  have  seen  that  the  new 
Pharaoh — the  horse  and  his  rider  —  was  thrown  into  the, 
sea,  and  sunk  to  the  bottom  like  a  stone.  We  have  heard  the 
song  of  deliverance  of  the  new  Israel  when  the  new  Moses 
had  crossed  the  Red  Sea  —  the  River  Tiber.  We  have  seen 
that  the  new  Moses,  going  on  to  the  conquest  of  the  heathen 
in  the  wilderness,  set  up  the  tabernacle  and  pitched  it  far  off 

4  Schaff's  translation,  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  g  75,  par. 
5,  note  1.  The  following  is  the  Latin,  from  the  same  place  :  "  Imperator  Con- 
stantinus  Aug.  Helpidio  :  Omnes  judices,  urbanseque  plebes  et  cunctarum  artium 
officia  venerabili  die  Soils  quiescant.  Ruri  tamen  positi  agrorum  culturae  libere 
licenterque  inserviant,  quoniam  frequenter  evenit,  ut  non  aptius  alio  die  f rumenta 
sulcis  aut  vineae  ecrobibus  mandentur,  ne  occasione  moment!  pereat  commoditas 
eoelesti  provisione  concessa," 


SUNDAY  LEGISLATION  18  RELIGIOUS  ONLY.       313 

from  the  camp,  where  he  received  "  divine"  direction  as  to 
how  he  should  conduct  "the  battles  of  the  Lord."  Thus  far 
in  the  establishment  of  the  new  theocracy,  each  step  in  the 
course  of  the  original  theocracy  had  been  imitated. 

Now  this  establishment  of  Sunday  observance  by  law, 
was  simply  another  step  taken  by  the  creators  of  the  new 
theocracy  in  imitation  of  the  original.  After  the  original 
Israel  had  crossed  the  Red  Sea,  and  had  gone  a  consider- 
able journey  in  the  wilderness,  God  established  among 
them,  by  a  law,  too,  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  a  day 
of  weekly  rest.  This  setting  apart  of  Sunday  in  the  new 
theocracy,  and  its  observance  being  established  and  enforced 
by  law,  was  in  imitation  of  the  act  of  God  in  tlie  original 
theocracy  in  establishing  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath. 
This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  the  same  bishop, 
who  has  already  given  us  so  extensive  a  view  of  the  work- 
ings of  the  new  theocracy.  And  these  are  the  words  :  — 

"All  things  whatsoever  that  it  was^duty  to  do  on  the  Sabbath,  these 
we  have  transferred  to  the  Lord's  day."  — 


Now  the  Sabbath  is  wholly  religious.  The  government 
in  which  its  observance  was  enforced  was  the  government  of 
God.  The  law  by  which  its  observance  was  enforced  was 
the  law  of  God.  .The  observance  of  the  Sabbath  was  in 
recognition  of  Jehovah  as  the  true  God,  and  was  a  part  of 
the  worship  of  him  as  such.  Now  when  it  is  declared  by 
one  of  the  chiefest  factors  in  the  new  theocracy,  that,  all 
things  whatsoever  that  it  was  duty  to  do  on  the  Sabbath,  these 
we  have  transferred  to  the  Sunday,  this  in  the  connection  in 
which  it  stands,  is  the  strongest  possible  proof  that  the 
observance  of  the  day  and  the  object  of  the  law  were  wholly 
religious,  without  a  single  civil  element  anywhere  even  con- 
templated. This  is  confirmed  by  the  — 

Second  Count.     In  accordance  with  their  idea  of  a  the- 


5 "Commentary  on  the  Psalms,"  xcii,  quoted  in  Cox's  "Sabbath  Literature," 
Vol.  i,  p.  361,  and  in  the  "Sabbath  Manual,"  by  Justin  Edwards,  pp.  125-127. 


314  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

ocracj,  the  governmental  system  which  was  now  established 
composed  the  kingdom  of  God.  We  have  seen  how  this 
idea  was  entertained  by  the  bishops  at  the  banquet  which 
Constantine  gave  to  them  at  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Nice. 
We  have  seen  it  further  adopted  when  Constantine's  mother 
sent  to  him  the  nails  of  the  "true  cross,"  of  which  he  made  a 
bridle  bit,  when  the  bishops  declared  that  the  prophecy  was 
fulfilled  which  says,  "In  that  day  [the  day  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  upon  earth]  shall  there  be  upon  the  bridles  of  the 
horses,  holiness  unto  the  Lord."  This  idea,  however,  stands 
out  in  its  fullness,  in  an  oration  which  Eusebius  delivered  in 
praise  of  Constantine,  and  in  his  presence,  on  the  thirtieth 
anniversary  of  the  emperor's  reign.  The  flattering  bishop 
announced  that  God  gave  to  Constantine  greater  proofs  of 
his  beneficence  in  proportion  to  the  emperor's  holy  services 
to  him,  and  accordingly  had  permitted  him  to  celebrate 
already  three  decades,  and  now  was  entered  upon  the  fourth. 
He  related  how  the  emperor  at  the  end  of  each  decen- 
nial period,  had  advanced  one  of  his  sons  to  a  share  of 
the  imperial  power  ;  and  now  in  the  absence  of  other  sons, 
he  would  extend  the  like  favor  to  other  of  his  kindred.  Thus 
he  said  :  — 

"The  eldest,  who  bears  his  father's  name,  ne  received  as  his  partner 
in  the  empire  about  the  close  of  the  first  decade  of  his  reign  :  the  second, 
next  in  point  of  age,  at  the  second  ;  and  the  third  in  like  manner  at  the 
third  decennial  period,  the  occasion  of  this  our  present  festival.  And 
now  that  the  fourth  period  has  commenced,  and  the  time  of  his  reign  is 
still  further  prolonged,  he  desires  to  extend  his  imperial  authority  by 
calling  still  more  of  his  kindred  to  partake  his  power ;  and,  by  the 
appointment  of  the  Ca?sars,  fulfills  the  predictions  of  the  holy  propliets, 
according  to  what  they  uttered  ages  before  :  '  And  the  saints  of  the  Most 
High  shall  take  the  kingdom,'"  —  Eusebius.6 

Then  as  we  have  seen  by  so  many  proofs  that  the  sun 
was  the  chief  deity  in  this  new  kingdom  of  God,  the  bishop 
proceeds  to  draw  for  the  edification  of  the  Apollo-loving 
umperor,  the  following  picture  of  him  as  the  sun  in  his 

6  "  Oration  in  Praise  of  Constantine,"  chap.  iii. 


THE  EMPIRE  A  "KINGDOM  OF   GOD."  315 

chariot  traversing  the  world ;  and  positively  defines  the 
system  of  government  as  a  monarchy  of  God  patterned  after 
the  divine  original  :  — 

"He  it  is  who  appoints  him  this  present  festival,  in  that  he  has 
made  him  victorious  over  every  enemy  that  disturbed  his  peace:  he  it  is 
who  displays  him  as  an  example  of  true  godliness  to  the  human  race. 
And  thus  our  emperor,  like  the  radiant  sun,  illuminates  the  most  distant 
subjects  of  his  empire  through  the  presence  of  the  CaBsars,  as  with  the 
far  piercing  rays  of  his  own  brightness.  To  us  who  occupy  the  Eastern 
regions  he  has  given  a  son  worthy  of  himself  ;  a  second  and  a  third  re- 
spectively to  other  departments  of  his  empire,  to  be,  as  it  were,  brilliant 
reflectors  of  the  light  which  proceeds  from  himself.  Once  more,  having 
harnessed,  as  it  were,  under  the  selfsame  yoke  the  four  most  noble 
Caesars  as  horses  in  the  imperial  chariot,  he  sits  on  high  and  directs  their 
course  by  the  reins  of  holy  harmony  and  concord  ;  and  himself  every- 
where present,  and  observant  of  every  event,  thus  traverses  every  region 
of  the  world.  Lastly,  invested  as  he  is  with  a  semblance  of  heavenly 
sovereignty,  he  directs  his  gaze  above,  and  frames  his  earthly  government 
according  to  the  pattern  of  that  divine  original,  feeling  strength  in  its  con- 
formity to  the  monarchy  of  God."  7 

This  is  evidence  enough  to  show  that  the  system  of  gov- 
ernment established  by  Constantino  and  the  bishops  was 
considered  as  in  very  fact,  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  laws 
therefore  being  laws  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  would  neces- 
sarily have  a  religious  character ;  and  that  such  was  held  to 
be  the  case,  is  made  plain  by  the  following  passage  :  — 

"Our  emperor,  ever  beloved  by  Him,  who  derives  the  source  of  impe- 
rial authority  from  above,  and  is  strong  in  the  power  of  his  sacred  title, 
has  controlled  the  empire  of  the  world  for  a  long  period  of  years. 
Again:  that  Preserver  of  the  universe  orders  these  heavens  and  earth, 
and  the  celestial  kingdom,  consistently  with  his  Father's  will.  Even  so 
our  emperor  whom  he  loves,  by  bringing  those  whom  he  rules  on  earth  to  the 
only  begotten  Word  and  Saviour,  renders  them  fit  subjects  of  his  kingdom."* 


7  Id.     The  reader  may  more  fully  understand  this  by  reference  to  the  illus- 
tration, opposite  page  507  of  this  book.     There  at  the  upper  left-hand  corner  of 
the  picture  can  be  seen  the  sun  in  his  chariot  driving  four  horses.     It  is  evident 
that  in  this  picture  which  the  bishop  has  drawn  of  the  emperor,  he  was  playing 
upon  the  sun-worshiping  sentiments  of  the  "  bishop  of  externals." 

8  Id.,  chap.  ii. 


316  THE   ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

As  the  object  of  the  emperor  was  to  render  the  people  fit 
subjects  for  this  kingdom  of  God,  the  Sunday  law  was 
plainly  in  the  interests  of  the  new  kingdom  of  God,  and 
was  therefore  religious  only.  This  is  yet  further  proved  by 
the  — 

Tfiird  Count.  The  purpose  of  the  first  Sunday  law,  was 
' '  that  the  day  might  be  devoted  with  less  interruption  to 
the  purposes  of  devotion."  This  is  Neander's  translation  of 
the  statement  of  Sozomen  respecting  the  first  law  closing 
public  offices  on  Friday  and  Sunday.9  Prof.  Walford's 
translation  of  the  passage  is  as  follows :  — 

"  He  also  enjoined  the  observance  of  the  day  termed  the  Lord's  day, 
which  the  Jews  call  the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  which  the  Greeks 
dedicate  to  the  sun,  as  likewise  the  day  before  the  seventh,  and  com- 
manded that  no  judicial  or  other  business  should  be  transacted  on  those 
days,  but  that  God  should  be  served  with  prayers  and  supplications."  — 
Sozomen. 10 

Such,  therefore,  was  the  character  and  intent  of  the  first 
enactment  respecting  Sunday.  And  of  the  second  Sunday 
law  we  have  a  statement  equally  clear,  that  such  was  its  pur- 
pose also.  In  praise  of  Constantine,  the  episcopal  "orator" 
says  :  — 

"He  commanded,  too,  that  one  day  should  be  regarded  as  a  special 
occasion  for  religious  worship."  —  Eusebius.11 

And  in  naming  the  great  things  which  Christ  had  been 
enabled  to  accomplish  by  the  help  of  Constantine,  he  shuts 
out  every  element  upon  which  a  civil  claim  might  be  based, 
by  continuing  in  the  following  words  :  — 

"Who  else  has  commanded  the  nations  inhabiting  the  continents  and 
islands  of  this  mighty  globe  to  assemble  weekly  on  the  Lord's  day,  and 
to  observe  it  as  a  festival,  not  indeed  for  the  pampering  of  the  body,  BUT 
for  the  comfort  and  invigoration  of  the  soul  by  instruction  in  divine  truth  f  " I2 


9  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"'  Vol.  ii,  Section  Third,  part 
ii,  div.  iii,  par.  2. 

10  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap.  viii. 

11 "  Oration  in  Praise  of  Constantine,"  chap.  Ix.  12/d.,  chap.  xvii. 


BY  AUTHORITY  OF  PONTIFEX  MAXIMTTS.          317 

As  the  purpose  of  the  Sunday  law  was  to  set  apart  the 
day  for  the  purposes  of  devotion,  for  the  comfort  and  invig- 
oration  of  the  soul  by  instruction  in  divine  truth,  and  for 
religious  worship,  it  follows  inevitably  that  the  legislation 
was  wholly  religious.  This  is  yet  further  supported  by 
the- 

Fourth  Count.  The  title  which  is  given  to  the  day  by 
Constantine  in  the  edict,  is  distinctively  religious.  It  is 
venerabili  die  solis  —  venerable  day  of  the  sun.  This  was  the 
pagan  religious  title  of  the  day,  and  to  every  heathen  was 
suggestive  of  the  religious  character  which  attached  to  the 
day  as  the  one  especially  devoted  to  the  sun  and  its  worship. 
An  additional  act  of  the  emperor  himself  in  this  connection, 
has  left  no  room  for  reasonable  doubt  that  the  intent  of  the 
law  was  religious  only.  As  the  interpreter  of  his  own  law, 
and  clearly  indicating  its  intent,  he  drew  up  the  following 
prayer,  which  he  had  the  soldiers  repeat  in  concert  at  a 
given  signal  every  Sunday  morning  :  — 

"We  acknowledge  thee  the  only  God:  we  own  thee  as  our  King,  and 
implore  thy  succor.  By  thy  favor  have  we  gotten  the  victory:  through 
thee  are  we  mightier  than  our  enemies.  We  render  thanks  for  thy  past 
benefits,  and  trust  thee  for  future  blessings.  Together  we  pray  to  thee, 
and  beseech  thee  long  to  preserve  to  us,  safe  and  triumphant,  our  em- 
peror Constantine  and  his  pious  sons."  —  JSusebius.13 

If,  however,  there  should  be  yet  in  the  mind  of  any  per- 
son a  lingering  doubt  as  to  whether  Constantine's  Sunday 
legislation  was  religious  only,  with  no  thought  of  any  civil 
character  whatever,  even  this  must  certainly  be  effectually 
removed  by  the  — 

Fifth  Count.  It  was  by  virtue  of  his  office  and  author- 
ity as  Pontifex  Maximus,  and  not  as  emperor,  that  the  day 
was  set  apart  to  this  use  ;  because  it  was  the  sole  preroga- 
tive of  the  Pontifex  Maximus  to  appoint  holy  days.  In 
proof  of  this,  we  have  excellent  authority  in  the  evidence  of 
two  competent  witnesses.  Here  is  the  first :  — 
13  "  Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iv,  chap.  xx. 


318  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

"The  rescript,  indeed,  for  the  religious  observance  of  the  Sunday 
.  .  .  was  enacted  .  .  .  for  the  whole  Roman  empire.  Yet,  unless  we 
had  direct  proof  that  the  decree  set  forth  the  Christian  reason  for  the 
sanctity  of  the  day,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  act  would  not  be 
received  by  the  greater  part  of  the  empire,  as  merely  adding  one  more 
festival  to  the  Fasti  of  the  empire,  as  proceeding  entirely  from  the  will 
of  the  emperor,  or  even  grounded  on  Ms  authority  as  Supreme  Pontiff,  by 
which  he  had  the  plenary  power  of  appointing  holy-days." — Afilman.1* 

It  is  true  that  this  statement  is  qualified  by  the  clause 
"unless  we  had  direct  proof  that  the  decree  set  forth  the 
Christian  reason  for  the  sanctity  of  the  day  ; "  but  this  quali- 
fication is  wholly  removed  by  another  statement  from  the 
same  author,  which  reads  as  follows  :  — 

"  The  rescript  commanding  the  celebration  of  the  Christian  Sabbath 
bears  no  allusion  to  its  peculiar  sanctity  as  a  Christian  institution.  It  is  the 
day  of  the  sun,  which  is  to  be  observed  by  the  general  veneration.  .  .  . 
But  the  believer  in  the  new  paganism,  of  which  the  solar  worship  was 
the  characteristic,  might  acquiesce  without  scruple  in  the  sanctity  of  the 
first  day  of  the  week. " 15 

This  is  confirmed  by  another  authority  as  follows  :  — 

"There  is  no  reference  whatever  in  his  law  either  to  the  fourth, 
commandment  or  the  resurrection  of  Christ." — Schaff.16 

Therefore,  as  it  is  admitted  that  unless  we  had  direct 
proof  that  the  decree  set  forth  the  Christian  reason  for  the 
sanctity  of  the  day,  it  was  merely  adding  one  more  festival 
to  the  Fasti  of  the  empire,  the  appointment  of  which  lay  in 
the  plenary  power  of  the  Pontifex  Maximus,  and  as  it  is 
plainly  stated  that  there  is  no  such  proof  ,  this  plainly  proves 
that  the  authority  for  the  appointment  of  the  day  lay  in  the 
office  of  the  Pontifex  Maximus,  and  that  authority  was 
wholly  religious. 

Our  second  witness  testifies  as  follows  :  — 

"A  law  of  the  year  321  ordered  tribunals,  shops,  and  workshops 
to  be  closed  on  the  day  of  the  sun,  and  he  [Constantine]  sent  to  the  legions, 

14  "Histoiy  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  9  from  the  end. 

15  Jd.j  chap,  i,  par.  44. 

16  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  75,  par.  5. 


COUNCIL   OF  NICE  AGAINST  THE  JEWS.          319 

to  be  recited  upon  that  day,  a  form  of  prayer  which  could  have  been 
employed  by  a  worshiper  of  Mithra,  of  Serapis,  or  of  Apollo,  quite  as 
well  as  by  a  Christian  believer.  This  was  the  official  sanction  of  the 
old  custom  of  addressing  a  prayer  to  the  rising  sun.  In  determining 
what  days  should  be  regarded  as  holy,  and  in  the  composition  of  a  prayer  for 
national  use,  CONSTANTINE  EXERCISED  ONE  OF  THE  RIGHTS  BELONGING  TO 
HIM  AS  PONTIFEX  MAXiMUs  ;  and  it  caused  no  surprise  that  he  should  do 
this. "  —  Duruy. lT 

In  the  face  of  such  evidence  as  this,  to  attempt  to  give 
to  the  Sunday  legislation  of  Constantine  a  civil  character,  to 
say  the  very  least,  seems  to  spring  from  a  wish  to  have  it 
so,  rather  than  from  a  desire  to  give  the  facts  simply  as 
they  are. 

The  Council  of  Nice  in  A.  D.  325  gave  another  impetus 
to  the  Sunday  movement.  It  decided  that  the  Roman  cus- 
tom of  celebrating  Easter  on  Sunday  only  should  be  followed 
throughout  the  whole  empire.  The  council  issued  a  letter 
to  the  churches,  in  which  is  the  following  passage  on  this 
subject :  — 

"  We  have  also  gratifying  intelligence  to  communicate  to  you  rela- 
tive to  unity  of  judgment  on  the  subject  of  the  most  holy  feast  of  Easter  : 
for  this  point  also  has  been  happily  settled  through  your  prayers ;  so 
that  all  the  brethren  in  the  East  who  have  heretofore  kept  this  festival 
when  the  Jews  did,  will  henceforth  conform  to  the  Romans  and  to  us, 
and  to  all  who  from  the  earliest  time  have  observed  our  period  of  cele- 
brating Easter."18 

This  was  followed  up  by  a  letter  from  "  Constantine  Au- 
gustus to  the  Churches, "  in  which  upon  this  point  he  said  :  — 

"  The  question  having  been  considered  relative  to  the  most  holy  day 
of  Easter,  it  was  determined  by  common  consent  that  it  would  be  proper 
that  all  should  celebrate  it  on  one  and  the  same  day  everywhere.  .  .  . 
And  in  the  first  place  it  seemed  very  unsuitable  in  the  celebration  of  this 
sacred  feast,  that  we  sJiould  follow  tlie  custom  of  the  Jews  ;  a  people  who, 
having  imbrued  their  hands  in  a  most  heinous  outrage,  and  thus  polluted 
their  souls,  are  deservedly  blind.  .  .  .  Let  us  then  have  nothing  in  common 
with  that  most  Jiostile  people  the  Jews.  .  .  .  Surely  we  should  never  suffer 

17  "  History  of  Rome,"  chap,  cii,  part  i,  par.  4  from  the  end. 

18  Socrates's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap  ix. 


320  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

Easter  to  be  kept  twice  in  one  and  the  same  year.  But  even  if  these  con- 
siderations were  not  laid  before  you,  it  became  your  prudence  at  all 
times  to  take  heed,  both  by  diligence  and  prayer,  that  the  purity  of  your 
soul  should  in  nothing  have  communion,  or  seem  to  have  accordance  with 
the  customs  of  men  so  utterly  depraved.  .  .  . 

"Since  then  it  was  desirable  that  this  should  be  so  amended  that  we 
should  have  nothing  in  common  with  that  nation  of  parricides,  and  of  those- 
who  slew  their  Lord  ;  and  since  the  order  is  a  becoming  one  which  is 
observed  by  all  the  churches  of  the  western,  southern,  and  northern 
parts,  and  by  some  also  in  the  eastern  ;  from  these  considerations  all 
have  on  the  present  occasion  thought  it  to  be  expedient,  and  I  pledged 
myself  that  it  would  be  satisfactory  to  your  prudent  penetration,  that 
what  is  observed  with  such  general  unanimity  of  sentiment  in  the  city  of 
Rome,  throughout  Italy,  Africa,  all  Egypt,  Spain,  France,  Britain,  Libya, 
the  whole  of  Greece,  and  the  dioceses  of  Asia,  Pontus,  and  Cilicia,  your 
intelligence  also  would  readily  concur  in.  Reflect,  too,  that  not  only  is 
there  a  greater  number  of  churches  in  the  places  before  mentioned,  but 
also  that  this  in  particular  is  a  most  sacred  obligation,  that  all  should  in 
common  desire  whatever  strict  reason  seems  to  demand,  and  which  has 
no  communion  with  the  perjury  of  the  Jews. 

"But  to  sum  up  matters  briefly,  it  was  determined  by  common  con- 
sent that  the  most  holy  festival  of  Easter  should  be  solemnized  on  one 
and  the  same  day ;  for  in  such  a  hallowed  solemnity  any  difference  is 
unseemly,  and  it  is  more  commendable  to  adopt  that  opinion  in  which 
there  will  be  no  intermixture  of  strange  error,  or  deviation  from  what  is 
right.  These  things  therefore  being  thus  ordered,  do  you  gladly  receive 
this  heavenly  and  truly  divine  command  ;  for  whatever  is  done  in  the  sacred 
assemblies  of  the  bishops  is  referable  to  the  divine  will." 

This  throws  much  light  upon  the  next  move  that  was 
made,  as  these  things  were  made  the  basis  of  further  action 
by  the  church. 

At  every  step  in  the  course  of  the  apostasy,  at  every  step 
taken  in  adopting  the  forms  of  sun  worship,  and  against  the 
adoption  and  the  observance  of  Sunday  itself,  there  had 
been  constant  protest  by  all  real  Christians.  Those  who 
remained  faithful  to  Christ  and  to  the  truth  of  the  pure 
word  of  God  observed  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  according 
to  the  commandment,  and  according  to  the  word  of  God 
which  sets  forth  the  Sabbath  as  the  sign  by  which  the  Lord, 
the  Creator  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  is  distinguished 


SABBATH-KEEPERS  ACCURSED  FROM  CHRIST.        321 

from  all  other  gods.  These  accordingly  protested  against 
every  phase  and  form  of  sun  worship.  Others  compromised, 
especially  in  the  East,  by  observing  both  Sabbath  and  Sun- 
day. But  in  the  west  under  Roman  influences  and  under 
the  leadership  of  the  church  and  the  bishopric  of  Rome, 
Sunday  alone  was  adopted  and  observed. 

Against  this  Church  and  State  intrigue  throughout,  there 
had  been  also  as  against  every  other  step  in  the  course  of 
the  apostasy,  earnest  protest  by  all  real  Christians.  But 
when  it  came  to  the  point  where  the  church  would  enforce 
by  the  power  of  the  State  the  observance  of  Sunday,  this 
protest  became  stronger  than  ever.  And  additional  strength 
was  given  to  the  protest  at  this  point,  by  the  fact  that  it  was 
urged  in  the  words  of  the  very  arguments  which  the  Catholic 
Church  had  used  when  she  was  antagonized  rather  than 
courted  by  the  imperial  authority.  This,  with  the  strength 
of  the  argument  upon  the  merit  of  the  question  as  to  the 
day  which  should  be  observed,  greatly  weakened  the  force 
of  the  Sunday  law.  But  when,  in  addition  to  these  consid- 
erations, the  exemption  was  so  broad,  and  when  those  who 
observed  the  Sabbath  positively  refused  to  obey  the  Sunday 
law,  its  effect  was  virtually  nullified. 

In  order,  therefore,  to  the  accomplishment  of  her  origi- 
nal purpose,  it  now  became  necessary  for  the  church  to 
secure  legislation  extinguishing  all  exemption,  and  prohibit- 
ing the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  so  as  to  quench  that  pow- 
erful protest.  And  now,  coupled  with  the  necessity  of  the 
situation,  the  "truly  divine  command"  of  Constantine  and 
the  Council  of  Nice  that  "nothing"  should  be  held  "in 
common  with  the  Jews,"  was  made  the  basis  and  the  au- 
thority for  legislation,  utterly  to  crush  out  the  observance 
of  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord,  and  to  establish  the  observance 
of  Sunday  only  in  its  stead.  Accordingly,  the  Council  of 
Laodicea  enacted  the  following  canon  :  — 

"CANON  29.  Christians  shall  not  Judaize  and  be  idle  on  Saturday, 
but  shall  work  on  that  day ;  but  the  Lord's  day  they  shall  especially 


322  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

honor,  and,  as  being  Christians,  shall,  if  possible,  do  no  work  on  that 
day.  If,  however,  they  are  found  Judaizing,  they  shall  be  shut  out  from 
Christ." 16 

The  report  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea 
is  not  dated.  A  variety  of  dates  has  been  suggested,  of 
which  A.  D.  364  seems  to  have  been  the  most  favored. 
Hefele  allows  that  it  may  have  been  as  late  as  380.  But 
whatever  the  date,  before  A.  D.  380,  in  the  political  condi- 
tion of  the  empire,  this  could  not  be  made  effective  by  im- 
perial law.  In  A.  D.  364  Yalens  and  Valentinian  became 
emperors,  the  former  of  the  East  and  the  latter  of  the  West. 
For  six  years,  Yalens  was  indifferent  to  all  parties  ;  but  in 
A.  D.  370  he  became  a  zealous  Arian,  and  so  far  as  in  him 
lay,  established  the  Arian  doctrine  throughout  his  dominion. 
Valentinian,  though  a  Catholic,  kept  himself  aloof  from  all 
differences  or  controversies  among  church  parties.  This 
continued  till  3Y5,  when  Valentinian  died,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  two  sons,  one  aged  sixteen,  the  other  four, 
years.  In  3Y8  the  reign  of  Valens  ended,  and  Theodosius, 
a  Spanish  soldier,  was  appointed  emperor  of  the  East.  In 
380  he  was  baptized  into  the  Catholic  Church,  and  imme- 
diately an  edict  was  issued  in  the  name  of  the  three  emper- 
ors, commanding  all  subjects  of  the  empire,  of  whatever 
party  or  name,  to  adopt  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  assume  the  name  of  "Catholic  Christians." 

As  now  "  the  State  itself  recognized  the  church  as  such, 
and  endeavored  to  uphold  her  in  the  prosecution  of  her  prin- 
ciples and  the  attainment  of  her  ends"  (Neander11)  ;  and 


16Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  Laodicea.  In  both  the  Greek 
and  Latin  copies  of  this  canon,  the  word  "  Sabbath  "  is  used  instead  of  "  Saturday," 
and  the  wotd  "anathema" — accursed  —  is  the  one  which  Hefele  translates 
"shut  out."  The  following  is  the  Latin:  "  Quod  non  oportet  Christianos  Juda- 
izere  et  otiare  in  Sabbato,  sed  operari  in  eodem  die.  Preferentes  autem  In  yen- 
eratione  Dominicum  diem  si  vacare  voluerint,  ut  Christian!  hoc  faciat ;  quod  si 
reperti  fuerint  Judaizere  Anathema  sint  a  Christo." 

17  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Sectiou  Third, 
part  ii,  div.  iii,  par.  4. 


ALL  EXEMPTION  ABOLISHED.  323 

as  Theodosius  had  already  ordered  that  all  his  subjects 
"should  steadfastly  adhere  to  the  religion  which  was  taught 
by  St.  Peter  to  the  Romans,  which  faithful  tradition  "  had 
preserved,  and  which  was  then  "professed  by  the  pontiff, 
Damasus  "  of  Rome  ;  and  that  they  should  all  "assume  the 
title  of  Catholic  Christians  ; "  it  was  easy  to  bring  the  impe- 
rial power  to  the  support  of  the  decrees  of  the  church,  and 
make  the  Laodicean  Canon  effective.  Now  was  given  the 
opportunity  for  which  the  church  had  waited  so  long,  and 
she  made  use  of  it.  At  the  earliest  possible  moment  she 
secured  the  desired  law  ;  for,  says  the  record  :  — 

"By  a  law  of  the  year  386,  those  older  changes  effected  by  the  em- 
peror Constantine  were  more  rigorously  enforced  ;  and,  in  general,  civil 
transactions  of  every  kind  on  Sunday  were  strictly  forbidden.  Whoever 
transgressed  was  to  be  considered,  in  fact,  as  guilty  of  sacrilege."  — 
Neander.1* 

As  the  direct  result  of  this  law,  there  soon  appeared  an 
evil  which,  under  the  circumstances  and  in  the  logic  of  the 
case,  called  for  further  legislation  in  the  same  direction. 
The  law  forbade  all  work.  But  as  the  people  had  not  such 
religion  as  would  cause  them  to  devote  the  day  to  pious  and 
moral  exercises,  the  effect  of  the  law  was  only  to  enforce 
idleness.  Enforced  idleness  only  multiplied  opportunity  for 
dissipation.  As  the  natural  consequence,  the  circuses  and 
the  theaters  throughout  the  empire  were  crowded  every  Sun- 
day. But  the  object  of  the  law,  from  the  first  one  that  was 
issued,  was  that  the  day  might  be  used  for  the  purposes  of 
devotion,  and  that  the  people  might  go  to  church.  But 
they  had  not  sufficient  religion  to  lead  them  to  church,  when 
there  was  opportunity  for  amusement.  Therefore,  the 
record  is : — 

"Owing  to  the  prevailing  passion  at  that  time,  especially  in  the 
large  cities,  to  run  after  the  various  public  shows,  it  so  happened  that 
when  these  spectacles  fell  on  the  same  days  which  had  been  consecrated 
by  the  church  to  some  religious  festival,  they  proved  a  great  hinderance 

18  Id. 


324  THE   ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

to  the  devotion  of  Christians,  though  chiefly,  it  must  be  allowed,  to  those 
whose  Christianity  was  the  least  an  affair  of  the  life  and  of  the  heart."  — 

Neander.19 

Assuredly  !  An  open  circus  or  theater  will  always  prove 
a  great  hinderance  to  the  devotion  of  those  Christians  whose 
Christianity  is  the  least  an  affair  of  the  life  and  of  the  heart. 
In  other  words,  an  open  circus  or  theater  will  always  be  a 
great  hinderance  to  the  devotion  of  those  who  have  not 
religion  enough  to  keep  them  from  going  to  it,  but  who  only 
want  to  use  the  profession  of  religion  to  maintain  their  popu- 
larity, and  to  promote  their  selfish  interests.  On  the  other 
hand,  to  the  devotion  of  those  whose  Christianity  is  really 
an  affair  of  the  life  and  of  the  heart,  an  open  circus  or 
theater  will  never  be  a  particle  of  hinderance,  whether  open 
at  church  time  or  all  the  time.  With  the  people  there,  how- 
ever, if  the  circus  and  theater  were  open  at  the  same  time 
as  the  church,  the  church-members,  as  well  as  others,  not 
being  able  to  go  to  both  places  at  once,  would  go  to  the  cir- 
cus or  the  theater  instead  of  to  the  church. 

But  this  was  not  what  the  bishops  wanted.  This  was 
n^t  that  for  which  all  work  had  been  forbidden.  All  work 
had  been  forbidden  in  order  that  the  people  might  go  to 
church  ;  but  instead  of  that,  they  crowded  to  the  circus  and 
the  theater,  and  the  audiences  of  the  bishops  were  rather  slim. 
This  was  not  at  all  satisfying  to  their  pride  ;  and  they  took 
care  to  let  it  be  known. 

"  Church  teachers  .  .  .  were,  in  truth,  often  forced  to  complain  that 
in  such  competitions  the  theater  was  vastly  more  frequented  than  the 
church."  — -  Neandcr.™ 

And  the  church  was  now  in  a  condition  in  which  she 
could  not  bear  competition.  She  must  have  a  monopoly. 
Therefore  the  next  step  to  be  taken,  and  the  logical  one, 
too,  was  to  have  the  circuses  and  theaters  closed  on  Sundays 
and  other  special  church  days,  so  that  the  churches  and  the 
theaters  should  not  be  open  at  the  same  time. 

19  Id,  par.  5.  ™ Id. 


o 
fc 

H 
i—  i 

0 

P 
<J 

O 

£ 
i—  i 

E-t 

^ 

<3 
P3 
O 

GO 

p 


a 

H 
3 

w 


THE  CHURCH  OBTAINS   THE  MONOPOLY.          325 

There  was  another  feature  of  the  case  which  gave  the 
bishops  the  opportunity  to  make  their  new  demands  appear 
plausible  by  urging  in  another  form  the  selfish  and  sophist- 
ical plea  upon  which  they  had  asked  for  the  first  edict  re- 
speoting  church  days.  In  the  circuses  and  the  theaters 
large  numbers  of  men  were  employed,  among  whom  many 
were  church-members.  But,  rather  than  give  up  their 
places,  the  church-members  would  work  on  Sunday.  The 
bishops  complained  that  these  were  compelled  to  work,  and 
were  prohibited  to  wDrship  :  they  pronounced  it  persecution, 
and  demanded  more  Sunday  laws  for  "  protection."- 

As  a  consequence,  therefore,  and  in  the  logic  of  the  sit- 
uation, at  a  council  held  at  Carthage  in  June,  A.  D.  401, 
the  following  canon  was  enacted  :  — 

"CANON  5.  On  Sundays  and  feast-days,  no  plays  may  be  performed."21 

That  this  canon  might  also  be  made  effective,  the  bishops 
in  the  same  council  passed  a  resolution,  and  sent  up  a  peti- 
tion to  the  Emperor  Honorms,  praying  — 

"That  the  public  shows  might  be  transferred  from  the  Christian  Sunday 
and  from  feast-days,  to  some  other  days  of  the  week." — Neander.w 

The  reason  given  in  support  of  the  petition  was,  not  only 
as  above,  that  those  who  worked  in  government  offices  and 
employments  at  such  times,  were  persecuted,  but  that  — 

"  The  people  congregate  more  to  the  circus  than  to  the  church."23 

The  church-members  had  not  enough  religion  or  love  of 
right  to  do  what  they  professed  to  believe  was  right ;  there- 
fore the  State  was  asked  to  take  away  from  them  all  oppor- 
tunity to  do  wrong  :  then  they  would  all  be  Christians  !  The 
devil  himself  could  be  made  that  kind  of  Christian  in  that 
way  —  and  he  would  be  the  devil  still ! 

81Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  Fifth  Carthaginian. 
22  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  li,  Section  Third,  part 
I,  div.  iii,  par.  5.  23  jd. 

27 


326  THE   ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

The  petition  of  the  Council  of  Carthage  could  not  be 
granted  at  once,  but  in  425  the  desired  law  was  secured ; 
and  to  this  also  there  was  attached  the  reason  that  was  given 
for  the  first  Sunday  law  that  ever  was  made  ;  namely, — 

"In  order  that  the  devotion  of  the  faithful  might  be  free  from  all  dis- 
turbance."24 

It  must  constantly  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  the 
only  way  in  which  "  the  devotion  of  the  faithful "  was  "  dis- 
turbed" by  these  things,  was  that  when  the  circus  or  the 
theater  was  open  at  the  same  time  that  the  church  was 
open,  the  "faithful"  would  go  to  the  circus  or  the  theater 
instead  of  to  church,  and  therefore  their  "devotion"  was 
"disturbed."  And  of  course  the  only  way  in  which  the 
"devotion  "  of  such  "  faithful "  ones  could  be  freed  from  all 
disturbance,  was  to  close  the  circuses  and  the  theaters  at 
church  time. 

In  the  logic  of  this  theory,  there  was  one  more  step  to 
be  taken.  To  see  how  logically  ft  came  about,  let  us  glance 
at  the  steps  taken  from  the  first  one  up  to  this  point :  First, 
the  church  had  all  work  on  Sunday  forbidden,  in  order  that 
the  people  might  attend  to  things  divine  :  work  was  for- 
bidden, that  the  people  might  worship.  But  the  people 
would  not  worship  :  they  went  to  the  circus  and  the  theater 
instead  of  to  church.  Then  the  church  had  laws  enacted 
closing  the  circuses  and  the  theaters,  in  order  that  the  people 
might  attend  church.  But  even  then  the  people  would  not 
be  devoted,  nor  attend  church  ;  for  they  had  no  real  religion. 
The  next  step  to  be  taken,  therefore,  in  the  logic  of  the 
situation,  was  to  compel  them  to  be  devoted  —  to  compel 
them  to  attend  to  things  divine.  This  was  the  next  step 
logically  to  be  taken,  and  it  was  taken.  The  theocratical 
bishops  were  equal  to  the  occasion.  They  were  ready  with 
a  theory  that  exactly  met  the  demands  of  the  case  ;  and  one 
of  the  greatest  of  the  Catholic  Church  Fathers  and  Catholic 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  INQUISITION.  327 

saints  was  the  father  of  this  Catholic  saintly  theory.     He 
wrote  :  — 

' '  It  is,  indeed,  better  that  men  should  be  brought  to  serve  God  by 
instruction  than  by  fear  of  punishment  or  by  pain.  But  because  the 
former  means  are  better,  the  latter  must  not  therefore  be  neglected. 
.  .  .  Many  must  often  be  brought  back  to  their  Lord,  like  wicked 
servants,  by  the  rod  of  temporal  suffering,  before  they  attain  the  highest 
grade  of  religious  development." — -Augustine.25 

Of  this  theory,  the  author  who  of  all  the  church  histori- 
ans has  best  exposed  the  evil  workings  of-  this  false  theoc- 
racy, justly  observes  :  — 

"  It  was  by  Augustine,  then,  that  a  theory  was  proposed  and  founded, 
which  .  .  .  contained  the  germ  of  that  whole  system  of  spiritual  des- 
potism of  intolerance  and  persecution,  which  ended  in  the  tribunals  of 
the  Inquisition." — Neander?6 

The  history  of  the  Inquisition  is  only  the  history  of  this 
infamous  theory  of  Augustine's.  But  this  theory  is  only  the 
logical  sequence  of  the  theory  upon  which  the  whole  series 
of  Sunday  laws  was  founded. 

In  closing  his  history  of  this  particular  subject,  the  same 
author  says :  — 

"In  this  way  the  Church  received  help  from  the  State  for  the  further- 
ance of  her  ends." — Neander.™ 

This  statement  is  correct.  Constantine  did  many  things 
to  favor  the  bishops.  He  gave  them  money  and  political 
preference.  He  made  their  decisions  in  disputed  cases  final, 
as  the  decision  of  Jesus  Christ.  But  in  nothing  that  he  did 
for  them  did  he  give  them  power  over  those  who  did  not 
belong  to  the  church,  to  compel  them  to  act  as  though  they 
did,  except  in  the  one  thing  of  the  Sunday  law.  In  the  Sun- 
day law,  power  was  given  to  the  church  to  compel  those  who 

25 "The  Correction  of  tbe  Donatists,"  chap.  vi.  I  adopt  Schaff's  translation, 
"History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  I  27,  par.  12. 

26  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Second, 
part  iii,  div.  i,  last  par. 

27  Id.,  Section  Third,  part  ii,  div.  iii,  par.  5. 


328  THE  ORIGINAL  SUNDAY  LEGISLATION. 

did  not  belong  to  the  church,  and  who  were  not  subject  to 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  church,  to  obey  the  commands  of  the 
church.  In  the  Sunday  law  there  was  given  to  the  church 
control  of  the  civil  power,  that  by  it  she  could  compel  those 
who  did  not  belong  to  the  church  to  act  as  though  they  did. 
The  history  of  Constantino's  time  may  be  searched  through 
and  through,  and  it  will  be  found  that  in  nothing  did  he 
give  to  the  church  any  such  power,  except  in  this  one  thing 
—  the  Sunday  law.  Neander's  statement  is  literally  correct, 
that  it  was  "in  this  way  the  church  received  help  from  the 
State  for  the  furtherance  of  her  ends." 

That  this  may  be  set  before  the  reader  in  as  clear  a  light 
as  possible,  we  shall  here  summarize  the  facts  stated  by 
Neander  in  their  direct  bearing.  He  says  of  the  carrying 
into  effect  of  the  theocratical  theory  of  the  apostate  bishops, 
that  they  made  themselves  dependent  upon  Constantine  by 
their  disputes,  and  "by  their  determination  to  use  the  power 
of  the  State  for  the  furtherance  of  their  aims."  Then  he 
mentions  the  first  and  second  Sunday  laws  of  Constantine, 
the  Sunday  law  of  A.  D.  386,  the  Carthaginian  council,  reso- 
lution, and  petition  of  401,  and  the  law  of  425  in  response 
to  this  petition  ;  and  then,  without  a  break,  and  with  direct 
reference  to  these  Sunday  laws,  he  says  :  "In  this  way  the 
church  received  help  from  the  State  for  the  furtherance  of 
her  ends." 

She  started  out  with  the  determination  to  do  it ;  she  did 
it;  and  li  in  this  way"  she  did  it.  And  when  she  had 
secured  control  of  the  power  of  the  State,  she  used  it  for 
the  furtherance  of  her  own  aims,  and  that  in  her  own  des- 
potic way,  as  announced  in  the  inquisitorial  theory  of  Augus- 
tine. The  first  step  logically  led  to  the  last.  And  the  theo- 
cratical leaders  in  the  movement  had  the  cruel  courage  to  fol- 
low the  first  step  unto  the  last,  as  framed  in  the  words  of 
Augustine,  and  illustrated  in  the  horrors  of  the  Inquisition 
during  the  fearful  record  of  the  dreary  ages  in  which  the 
bishopric  of  Rome  was  supreme  over  kings  and  nations. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


ESTABLISHMENT   OF  THE    CATHOLIC    FAITH. 

THE  Donatist  dispute  had  developed  the  decision  and 
established  the  fact  that  it  was  "the  Catholic  Church  of 
Christians  "  in  which  was  embodied  the  Christianity  which 
was  to  be  recognized  as  the  imperial  religion.  Constantine 
had  allied  himself  with  the  church  only  for  political  advan- 
tage. The  only  use  he  had  for  the  church,  was  in  a  political 
way.  Its  value  for  this  purpose  lay  entirely  in  its  unity. 
If  the  church  should  be  all  broken  up  and  divided  into 
separate  bodies,  its  value  as  a  political  factor  would  be 
gone. 

The  Catholic  Church,  on  her  part,  had  long  asserted  the 
necessity  of  unity  with  the  bishopric,  a  unity  in  which  the 
bishopric  should  be  possessed  of  authority  to  prohibit,  as 
well  as  power  to  prevent,  heresy.  The  church  had  sup- 
ported and  aided  Constantine  in  the  overthrow  of  Maxentius 
and  the  conquest  of  Rome.  She  again  supported  and  mate- 
rially aided  him  in  the  overthrow  of  Licinius  and  the  com- 
plete conquest  of  the  whole  empire.  She  had  received  a 
rich  reward  for  her  assistance  in  the  first  political  move  ; 
and  she  now  demanded  her  pay  for  services  rendered  in  the 
second  and  final  one. 

The  Catholic  Church  demanded  assistance  in  her  ambi- 
tious aim  to  make  her  power  and  authority  absolute  over 
all ;  and  for  Constantino's  purposes  it  was  essential  that  the 
church  should  be  a  unit.  These  two  considerations  com- 
bined to  produce  results  both  immediate  and  remote,  that 

[329] 


330      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

proved  a  curse  to  the  time  then  present  ^and  to  ages  to  fol- 
low. The  immediate  result  was  that  Constantine  had  no 
sooner  compassed  the  destruction  of  Licinius  in  A.  D.  323, 
than  he  issued  an  edict  against  the  Novatians,  Valentinians, 
Marcionites,  Paulians,  Cataphrygians,  and  "  all  who  devised 
and  supported  heresies  by  means  of  private  assemblies," 
denouncing  them  and  their  heresies,  and  commanding  them 
all  to  enter  the  Catholic  Church.  The  edict  runs  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"  Victor  Constantinus  Maximus  Augustus,  to  the  heretics:  Understand 
now,  by  this  present  statute,  ye  Novatians,  Valentinians,  Marcionites, 
Paulians,  ye  who  are  called  Cataphrygians,  and  all  ye  who  devise  and 
support  heresies  by  means  of  your  private  assemblies,  with  what  a  tissue 
of  falsehood  and  vanity,  with  what  destructive  and  venomous  errors, 
your  doctrines  are  inseparably  interwoven  ;  so  that  through  you  the 
healthy  soul  is  stricken  with  disease',  and  the  living  becomes  the  prey  of 
everlasting  death.  Ye  haters  and  enemies  of  truth  and  life,  in  league 
with  destruction  !  All  your  counsels  are  opposed  to  the  truth,  but 
familiar  with  deeds  of  baseness  ;  fit  subjects  for  the  fabulous  follies  of 
the  stage:  and  by  these  ye  frame  falsehoods,  oppress  the  innocent,  and 
withhold  the  light  from  them  that  believe.  Ever  trespassing  under  the 
mask  of  godliness,  ye  fill  all  things  with  defilement:  ye  pierce  the  pure 
and  guileless  conscience  with  deadly  wounds,  while  ye  withdraw,  one 
may  almost  say,  the  very  light  of  day  from  the  eyes  of  men.  But  why 
should  I  particularize,  when  to  speak  of  your  criminality  as  it  deserves, 
demands  more  time  and  leisure  than  I  can  give  ?  For  so  long  and  un- 
measured is  the  catalogue  of  your  offenses,  so  hateful  and  altogether 
atrocious  are  they,  that  a  single  day  would  not  suffice  to  recount  them 
all.  And  indeed  it  is  well  to  turn  one's  ears  and  eyes  from  such  a  sub- 
ject, lest  by  a  description  of  each  particular  evil,  the  pure  sincerity  and 
freshness  of  one's  own  faith  be  impaired.  Why  then  do  I  still  bear  with 
such  abounding  evil ;  especially  since  this  protracted  clemency  is  the 
cause  that  some  who  were  sound  are  become  tainted  with  this  pestilent 
disease  ?  Why  not  at  once  strike,  as  it  were,  at  the  root  of  so  great  a 
mischief  by  a  public  manifestation  of  displeasure  ? 

"  Forasmuch,  then,  as  it  is  no  longer  possible  to  bear  with  your  per- 
nicious errors,  we  give  warning  by  this  present  statute  that  none  of  you 
henceforth  presume  to  assemble  yourselves  together.  We  have  directed, 
accordingly,  that  you  be  deprived  of  all  the  houses  in  which  you  are 
accustomed  to  hold  your  assemblies:  and  our  care  in  this  respect  extends 
so  far  as  to  forbid  the  holding  of  your  superstitious  and  senseless  meet- 


THE   TRINITARIAN  CONTROVERSY.  331 

ings,  not  in  public  merely,  but  in  any  private  house  or  place  whatsoever. 
Let  those  of  you,  therefore,  who  are  desirous  of  embracing  the  true  and 
pure  religion,  take  the  far  better  course  of  entering  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  uniting  with  it  in  holy  fellowship,  whereby  you  will  be  enabled  to 
arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  In  any  case,  the  delusions  of  your 
perverted  understandings  must  entirely  cease  to  mingle  with  and  mar  the 
felicity  of  our  present  times  ;  I  mean  the  impious  and  wretched  double- 
mindedness  of  heretics  and  schismatics.  For  it  is  an  object  worthy  of 
that  prosperity  which  we  enjoy  through  the  favor  of  God,  to  endeavor 
to  bring  back  those  who  in  time  past  were  living  in  the  hope  of  future 
blessing,  from  all  irregularity  and  error,  to  the  right  path,  from  darkness 
to  light,  from  vanity  to  truth,  from  death  to  salvation.  And  in  order 
that  this  remedy  may  be  applied  with  effectual  power,  we  have  com- 
manded (as  before  said),  that  you  be  positively  deprived  of  every  gather- 
ing point  for  your  superstitious  meetings  ;  I  mean  all  the  houses  of 
prayer  (if  such  be  worthy  of  the  name)  which  belong  to  heretics,  and 
that  these  be  made  over  without  delay  to  the  Catholic  Church  ;  that  any 
other  places  be  confiscated  to  the  public  service,  and  no  facility  what- 
ever be  left  for  any  future  gathering  ;  in  order  that  from  this  day  for- 
ward none  of  your  unlawful  assemblies  may  presume  to  appear  in  any 
public  or  private  place.  Let  this  edict  be  made  public." 1 

Some  of  the  penal  regulations  of  this  edict  "were  copied 
from  the  edicts  of  Diocletian  ;  and  this  method  of  conversion 
was  applauded  by  the  same  bishops  who  had  felt  the  hand  of 
oppression,  and  had  pleaded  for  the  rights  of  humanity." — 
Gibbon* 

The  Donatist  dispute  resulted  in  the  establishment  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  Yet  that  dispute  involved  no  question  of 
doctrine,  but  of  discipline  only.  Just  at  this  time,  however, 
there  sprang  into  prominence  the  famous  Trinitarian  Con- 
troversy, which  involved,  and  under  the  circumstances  de- 
manded, an  imperial  decision  as  to  what  was  the  Catholic 
Church  in  point  of  doctrine  —  what  was  the  Catholic  Church 
in  deed  and  in  truth,  and  which  plunged  the  empire  into  a 
sea  of  tumult  and  violence  that  continued  as  long  as  the 
empire  itself  continued,  and  afflicted  other  nations  after  the 
empire  had  perished. 

^usebius's  "Life  of  Constantine,"  book  iii,  chaps.  Ixiv,  Ixv. 
8  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  I. 


332      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   TIIE   CATHOLIC  FAITIt. 

A  certain  Alexander  was  bishop  of  Alexandria.  Arius 
was  a  presbyter  in  charge  of  a  parish  church  in  the  same 
city.  Alexander  attempted  to  explain  "the  unity  of  the 
Holy  Trinity."  Arius  dissented  from  the  views  set  forth  by 
Alexander.  A  sort  of  synod  of  the  presbyters  of  the  city 
was  called,  and  the  question  was  discussed.  Both  sides 
claimed  the  victory,  and  the  controversy  spread.  Then 
Alexander  convened  a  council  of  a  hundred  bishops,  by  the 
majority  of  which  the  views  of  Alexander  were  indorsed. 
Upon  this,  Arius  was  commanded  to  abandon  his  own  opin- 
ions, and  adopt  Alexander's.  Arius  refused,  and  Alexander 
excommunicated  him  and  all  who  held  with  him  in  opinion, 
of  whom  there  were  a  considerable  number  of  bishops  and 
other  clergy,  and  many  of  the  people. 

The  partisans  of  Arius  wrote  to  many  bishops  a  statement 
of  their  views,  with  a  request  that  if  those  views  were  con- 
sidered correct,  they  would  use  their  influence  to  have  Alex- 
ander receive  them  again  to  communion  ;  but  if  they  thought 
the  views  to  be  wrong  in  any  particular,  they  would  signify 
it,  and  show  them  what  were  the  correct  opinions  on  the 
question.  Arius  for  himself  wrote  a  book  entitled  "Thalia," 
—  Songs  of  Joy  —  a  collection  of  songs  in  which  he  set  forth 
his  views.  This  expedient  took  well,  for  in  the  excited  state 
of  the  parties,  his  doctrinal  songs  were  hummed  everywhere. 
Alexander  on  his  part,  likewise,  sent  circular  letters  to  the 
principal  bishops  round  about.  The  controversy  spread 
everywhere,  and  as  it  spread,  it  deepened. 

One  of  the  chief  reasons  for  the  rapid  and  wide-spread 
interest  in  the  controversy  was  that  nobody  could  compre- 
hend or  understand  the  question  at  issue.  "It  was  the 
excess  of  dogmatism  founded  upon  the  most  abstract  words 
in  the  most  abstract  region  of  human  thought." — Stanley* 
There  was  no  dispute  about  the  fact  of  there  being  a  Trinity, 
it  was  about  the  nature  of  the  Trinity.  Both  parties  believed 
in  precisely  the  same  Trinity,  but  they  differed  upon  the  pre- 

3 "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  iii,  par.  8. 


1IOMOOUSION  ORHOMOIOUSION?  333 

cise  relationship  which  the  Son  bears  to  the  Father.     Alex- 
ander declared  :  — 

"The  Son  is  immutable  and  unchangeable,  all-sufficient  and  perfect, 
like  the  Father,  differing  only  in  this  one  respect,  that  the  Father  is  un- 
begotten.  He  is  the  exact  image  of  his  Father.  Everything  is  found  in 
the  image  which  exists  in  its  archetype  ;  and  it  was  this  that  our  Lord 
taught  when  he  said,  'My  Father  is  greater  than  I.'  And  accordingly 
we  believe  that  the  Son  proceeded  from  the  Father  ;  for  he  is  the  reflec- 
tion of  the  glory  of  the  Father,  and  the  figure  of  his  substance.  But  let 
no  one  be  led  from  this  to  the  supposition  that  the  Son  is  unbegotten,  as 
is  believed  by  some  who  are  deficient  in  intellectual  power  :  for  to  say 
that  he  was,  that  he  has  always  been,  and  that  he  existed  before  all  ages, 
is  not  to  say  that  he  is  unbegotten."  5 

Arius  said  :  — 

"We  say  and  believe,  and  have  taught,  and  do  teach,  that  the  Son  is 
not  unbegotten,  nor  in  any  way  unbegotten,  even  in  part ;  and  that  he 
does  not  derive  his  subsistence  from  any  matter ;  but  that  by  his  own 
will  and  counsel  he  has  subsisted  before  time,  and  before  ages,  as  perfect 
God,  and  only  begotten  and  unchangeable,  and  that  he  existed  not  be- 
fore he  was  begotten,  or  created,  of  purposed,  or  established.  For  he 
was  not  unbegotten.  We  are  persecuted  because  we  say  that  the  Son 
had  a  beginning,  but  that  God  was  without  beginning.  This  is  really 
the  cause  of  our  persecution,  and  likewise,  because  we  say  he  is  from 
nothing.  And  this  we  say,  because  he  is  neither  part  of  God,  nor  of  any 
subjacent  matter."6 

From  these  statements  by  the  originators  of  the  respec- 
tive sides  of  this  controversy,  it  appears  that  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a  single  point,  the  two  views  were  identical,  only 
being  stated  in  different  ways.  The  single  point  where  the 
difference  lay  was  that  Alexander  held  that  the  Son  was 
begotten  of  the  very  essence  of  the  Father,  and  is  therefore 
of  the  same  substance  with  the  Father,  while  Arius  held  that 
the  Son  was  begotten  by  the  Father,  not  from  his  own 
essence,  but  from  nothing ;  but  that  when  he  was  thus 
begotten,  he  was,,  and  is,  of  precisely  the  like  substance  with 
the  Father. 

6 Theodoret's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap.  Iv. 
6  Id.,  chap.  v.  , 


334       ESTABLISHMENT   OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

Whether  the  Son  of  God,  therefore,  is  of  the  same  sub- 
stance, or  only  of  like  substance,  with  the  Father,  was  the 
question  in  dispute.  The  controversy  was  carried  on  in 
Greek,  and  as  expressed  in  Greek  the  whole  question  turned 
upon  a  single  letter.  The  word  which  expressed  Alexander's 
belief,  is  Ilomoousion.  The  word  which  expressed  the  belief 
of  Arius,  is  Jlomoiousion.  One  of  the  words  has  two  "  i's" 
in  it,  and  the  other  has  but  one  ;  but  why  the  word  should  or 
should  not  have  that  additional  "i,"  neither  party  could  ever 
exactly  determine.  Even  Athanasius  himself,  who  succeeded 
Alexander  in  the  bishopric  of  Alexandria,  and  transcended 
him  in  every  other  quality,  ' '  has  candidly  confessed  that  when- 
ever he  forced  his  understanding  to  meditate  upon  the  divin- 
ity of  the  Logos,  his  toilsome  and  unavailing  efforts  recoiled 
on  themselves ;  that  the  more  he  thought,  the  less  he  com- 
prehended ;  and  the  more  he  wrote,  the  less  capable  was  he 
of  expressing  his  thoughts."--  Gibbon.7 

It  could  not  possibly  be  ^otherwise,  because  it  was  an 
attempt  of  the  finite  to  measure,  to  analyze,  and  even  to  dis- 
sect, the  Infinite.  It  was  an  attempt  to  make  the  human 
superior  to  the  divine.  God  is  infinite.  No  finite  mind  can 
comprehend  him  as  he  actually  is.  Christ  is  the  Word  — 
the  expression  of  the  thought  —  of  God;  and  none  but  he 
knows  the  depth  of  the  meaning  of  that  Word.  "He  had  a 
name  written  that  no  man  knew  lut  he  himself  /  .  .  .  and 
his  name  is  called  The  Word  of  God."  Rev.  xix,  12,  13. 
Neither  the  nature  nor  the  relationship  of  the  Father  and 
the  Son  can  ever  be  measured  by  the  mind  of  man.  "No 
man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father,  neither  knoweth  any 
man  the  Father  save  the  Son  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son 
will  reveal  him."  Matt,  xi,  27.  This  revelation  of  the 
Father  by  the  Son  cannot  be  complete  in  this  world.  It 
will  require  the  eternal  ages  for  man  to  understand  tfl  the 
exceeding  riches  of  his  grace  in  his  kindness  toward  us 
through  Christ  Jesus."  Eph.  ii,  V.  Therefore,  no  man's 

7  "  Declirje  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  8. 


THE  SECRET  OF   THE   CONTROVERSY,  335 

conception  of  God  can  ever  be  fixed  as  the  true  conception 
of  God.  God  will  still  be  infinitely  beyond  the  broadest 
comprehension  that  the  mind  of  man  can  measure.  The  true 
conception  of  God  can  be  attained  only  through  "the  Spirit 
of  revelation  in  the  knowledge  of  Him."  Eph.  i,  17.  There- 
fore the  only  thing  for  men  to  do  to  find  out  the  Almighty 
to  perfection,  is,  by  true  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  to  receive  the 
abiding  presence  of  this  Spirit  of  revelation,  and  then  quietly 
and  joyfully  wait  for  the  eternal  ages  to  reveal  "the  depth 
of  the  riches  both  of  the  wisdom  and  the  knowledge  of  God." 

One  who  lived  near  the  time  of,  and  was  well  acquainted 
with,  the  whole  matter,  has  well  remarked  that  the  discussion 
"  seemed  not  unlike  a  contest  in  the  dark  ;  for  neither  party 
appeared  to  understand  distinctly  the  grounds  on  which  they 
calumniated  one  another.  Those  who  objected  to  the  word 
'  consubstantial '  \_IIomoousion,  of  the  same  substance],  con- 
ceived that  those  who  approved  it,  favored  the  opinion  of 
Sabellius  and  Montanus  ;  they  therefore  called  them  blas- 
phemers, as  subverters  of  the  existence  of  the  Son  of  God. 
And  again  the  advocates  of  this  term,  charging  their  oppo- 
nents with  polytheism,  inveighed  against  them  as  introduc- 
ers of  heathen  superstitions.  ...  In  consequence  of  these 
misunderstandings,  each  of  them  wrote  volumes,  as  if  con- 
tending against  adversaries  :  and  although  it  was  admitted 
on  both  sides  that  the  Son  of  God  has  a  distinct  person  and 
existence,  and  all  acknowledged  that  there  is  one  God  in  a 
Trinity  of  persons,  yet,  from  what  cause  I  am  unable  to  di- 
vine, they  could  not  agree  among  themselves,  and  therefore 
were  never  at  peace."-—  Socrates* 

That  which  puzzled  Socrates  need  not  puzzle  us.  Al- 
though he  could  not  divine  why  they  should  not  agree  when 
they  believed  the  same  thing,  we  may  very  readily  do  so, 
with  no  fear  of  mistake.  The  difficulty  was  that  each  dis- 
putant required  that  all  the  others  should  not  only  believe 
what  he  believed,  but  that  they  should  believe  this  precisely 

8  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap,  xxiii. 


336      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

as  he  believed  it,  whereas  just  Jiow  he  believed  it,  he  himself 
could  not  define.  And  that  which  made  them  so  determined 
in  this  respect  was  that  ' '  the  contest  was  now  not  merely 
for  a  superiority  over  a  few  scattered  and  obscure  communi- 
ties :  it  was  agitated  on  a  far  vaster  theater  —  that  of  the 
Roman  world.  The  proselytes  whom  it  disputed  were 
sovereigns.  ...  It  is  but  judging  on  the  common  princi- 
ples of  human  nature  to  conclude  that  the  grandeur  of  the 
prize  supported  the  ambition  and  inflamed  the  passions  of 
the  contending  parties ;  that  human  motives  of  political 
power  and  aggrandizement  mingled  with  the  more  spiritual 
influence  of  the  love  of  truth,  and  zeal  for  the  purity  of 
religion."  —  Milman.g 

It  is  but  just  to  Arius,  however,  to  say  that  he  had  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  political  aspect  of  the  question.  He  de- 
fended his  views  in  the  field  of  argument,  and  maintained 
his  right  to  think  for  himself.  Others  took  up  the  argument 
with  more  ambitious  motives,  and  these  soon  carried  it  far 
beyond  the  power  or  the  guidance  of  Arius.  The  chief  of 
these  and  really  the  leader  of  the  Arian  party  in  the  politico- 
theological  contest,  was  Eusebius,  bishop  of  Nicomedia. 
This  Eusebius  is  to  be  distinguished  always  from  Eusebius, 
bishop  of  Caesarea,  who  was  Constantine's  favorite,  although 
both  were  Arian  s. 

The  controversy  spread  farther  and  farther,  and  raged 
more  fiercely  as  it  spread.  "All  classes  took  part  in  it,  and 
almost  all  took  part  with  equal  energy.  'Bishop  rose 
against  bishop,  district  against  district,  only  to  be  compared 
to  the  Symplegades  dashed  against  each  other  on  a  stormy 
day.'  So  violent  were  the  discussions  that  they  were 
parodied  in  the  pagan  theaters,  and  the  emperor's  statues 
were  broken  in  the  public  squares  in  the  conflicts  which  took 
place.  The  common  name  by  which  the  Arians  and  their 
system  were  designated  (and  we  may  conclude  they  were 
not  wanting  in  retorts),  was  the  Maniacs, —  the  Ariomaniacs, 

9  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  5. 


CONSTANTINO'S  DESIGN.  337 

the  Ariomania  ;  and  their  frantic  conduct  on  public  occa- 
sions afterwards  goes  far  to  justify  the  appellation.  Sailors, 
millers,  and  travelers  sang  the  disputed  doctrines  at  their 
occupations  or  on  their  journeys.  Every  corner,  every  alley 
of  the  city  [this  was  said  afterwards  of  Constantinople,  but 
must  have  been  still  more  true  of  Alexandria]  was  full  of 
these  discussions  —  the  streets,  the  market-places,  the  drap- 
ers, the  money-changers,  the  victualers.  Ask  a  man  '  how 
many  oboli  f '  he  answers  by  dogmatizing  on  generated  and 
ungenerated  being.  Inquire  the  price  of  bread,  and  you  are 
told,  'The  Son  is  subordinate  to  the  Father.'  Ask  if  the 
bath  is  ready,  and  you  are  told,  '  The  Son  arose  out  of  noth- 
ing. '"—  Stanley. 10 

Constantine's  golden  dream  of  a  united  Christendom  was 
again  grievously  disturbed.  The  bow  of  promise — of  the' 
bishops  —  which  had  so  brilliantly  irradiated  all  the  political 
prospect  when  his  alliance  was  formed  with  the  church 
party,  was  rudely  dissipated  by  the  dark  cloud  of  ecclesias- 
tical ambition,  and  the  angry  storm  of  sectarian  strife.  He 
wrote  a  letter  to  Alexander  and  Arius,  stating  to  them  his 
mission  of  uniting  the  world  under  one  head,  and  his 
anxious  desire  that  there  should  be  unity  among  all,  and 
exhorted  them  to  lay  aside  their  contentions,  forgive  one 
another,  use  their  efforts  for  the  restoration  of  peace,  and  so 
give  back  to  him  his  quiet  days  and  tranquil  nights.  The 
letter  is  long,  but  it  is  worth  giving  in  full,  not  only  on  ac- 
count of  the  present  question,  but  because  it  so  clearly 
shows  the  views  and  the  hopes  of  Constantine,  as  to  the 
unity  of  the  church  ;  and  which  controlled  him  in  his  alli- 
ance with  the  church  party. 

"Victor  Constantinus  Maximus  Augustus,  to  Alexander  and  Arius: 
I  call  that  God  to  witness  (as  well  I  may),  who  Is  the  helper  of  my  en- 
deavors, and  the  Preserver  of  all  men,  that  I  had  a  twofold  reason  for 
undertaking  that  duty  which  I  haw  now  effectually  performed. 

"My  design  then  was,  first,  to  bi*ing  the  diverse  judgments  formed  by  all 

10  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  iii,  par.  10. 


338        ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

nations  respecting  the  Deity  to  a  condition,  as  it  if  ere,  of  settled  uniformity ; 
and,  secondly,  to  restore  a  healthy  tone  to  the  system  of  the  world,  then 
suffering  under  the  malignant  power  of  a  grievous  distemper.  Keeping 
these  objects  in  view,  I  look  forward  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  one 
with  the  secret  gaze  of  the  mental  eye,  while  the  other  I  endeavored  to 
secure  by  the  aid  of  military  power.  For  I  was  aware  that,  if  I  should 
succeed  in  establishing,  according  to  my  hopes,  a  common  harmony  of 
sentiment  among  all  the  'servants  of  God,  the  general  course  of  affairs 
would  also  experience  a  change  correspondent  to  the  pious  desires  of 
them  all. 

"Finding,  then,  that  the  whole  of  Africa  was  pervaded  by  an  intol- 
erable spirit  of  madness  and  folly,  through  the  influences  of  those  whose 
wanton  temerity  had  presumed  to  rend  the  religion  of  the  people  into 
diverse  sects,  I  was  anxious  to  allay  the  virulence  of  this  disorder,  and 
could  discover  no  other  remedy  equal  to  the  occasion,  except  in  sending 
some  of  yourselves  to  aid  in  restoring  mutual  harmony  among  the  dis- 
putants, after  I  had  removed  that  common  enemy  of  mankind  [Licinius] 
who  had  interposed  his  lawless  sentence  for  the  prohibition  of  your  holy 
synods. 

"For  since  the  power  of  divine  light,  and  the  rule  of  our  holy 
religion,  which  have  illumined  the  world  by  their  sacred  radiance,  pro- 
ceeded in  the  first  instance,  through  the  favor  of  God,  from  the  bosom, 
as  it  were,  of  the  East,  I  naturally  believed  that  you  would  be  the  first 
to  promote  the  salvation  of  other  nations,  and  resolved  with  all  energy 
of  purpose  and  diligence  of  inquiry  to  seek  your  aid.  As  soon,  there- 
fore, as  I  had  secured  my  decisive  victory  and  unquestionable  triumph 
over  my  enemies,  my  first  inquiry  was  concerning  that  object  which  I 
felt  to  be  of  paramount  interest  and  importance. 

"But,  O  glorious  providence  of  God  !  How  deep  a  wound  did  not 
my  ears  only,  but  my  very  heart,  receive  in  the  report  that  divisions 
existed  among  yourselves  more  grievous  still  than  those  which  continued 
in  that  country,  so  that  you,  throiigh  iclwse  aid  I  had  7ioped  to  procure  a 
remedy  for  tlic  errors  of  others,  are  in  a  state  which  demands  even  more 
attention  than  theirs.  And  yet,  having  made  a  careful  inquiry  into  the 
origin  and  foundation  of  these  differences,  I  find  the  cause  to  be  of  a 
truly  insignificant  character,  and  quite  unworthy  of  such  fierce  conten- 
tion. Feeling  myself,  therefore,  compelled  to  address  you  in  this  letter, 
and  to  appeal  at  the  same  time  to  your  unanimity  and  sagacity,  I  call  on 
Divine  Providence  to  assist  me  in  the  task,  while  I  interrupt  your  dis- 
sensions in  the  character  of  a  minister  of  peace.  And  with  reason  :  for 
if  I  might  expect  (with  the  help  of  a  higher  power)  to  be  able  without 
difficulty,  by  a  judicious  appeal  to  the  pious  feelings  of  those  who  heard 
me,  to  recall  them  to  a  better  spirit,  how  can  I  refrain  from  promising 


CONSTANTINE'S   TASK.  339 

myself  a  far  easier  and  more  speedy  adjustment  of  this  difference,  when 
the  cause  which  hinders  general  harmony  of  sentiment  is  intrinsically 
trifling  and  of  little  moment  ? 

"I  understand,  then,  that  the  occasion  of  your  present  controversy 
is  to  be  traced  to  the  following  circumstances  :  that  you,  Alexander, 
demanded  of  the  presbyters  what  opinion  they  severally  maintained 
respecting  a  certain  passage  in  the  divine  law,  or  rather,  I  sho'uld  say, 
that  you  asked  them  something  connected  with  an  unprofitable  question  : 
and  then  that  you,  Arius,  inconsiderately  gave  utterance  to  objections 
which  ought  never  to  have  been  conceived  at  all,  or  if  conceived,  should 
have  been  buried  in  profound  silence.  Hence  it  was  that  a  dissension 
arose  between  you  ;  the  meeting  of  the  synod  was  prohibited  ;  and  the 
holy  people,  rent  into  diverse  parties,  no  longer  preserved  the  unity  of 
the  one  body.  Now,  therefore,  do  ye  both  exhibit  an  equal  degree  of 
forbearance,  and  receive  the  advice  which  your  fellow-servant  feels  him- 
self justly  entitled  to  give. 

"What  then  is  this  advice  ?  It  was  wrong  in  the  first  instance  to 
propose  such  questions  as  these,  or  to  reply  to  them  when  propounded. 
For  those  points  of  discussion  which  are  enjoined  by  the  authority  of  no 
law,  but  rather  suggested  by  the  contentious  spirit  which  is  fostered  by 
misused  leisure,  even  though  they  may  be  intended  merely  as  an  intel- 
lectual exercise,  ought  certainly  to  be  confined  to  the  region  of  our  own 
thoughts,  and  neither  hastily  produced  in  the  public  assemblies  of  the 
saints,  nor  unadvisedly  intrusted  to  the  general  ear.  For  how  very  few 
are  there  able  either  accurately  to  comprehend,  or  adequately  to  explain, 
subjects  so  sublime  and  abstruse  in  their  nature  ?  Or,  granting  that  one 
were  fully  competent  for  this,  in  how  few  ordinary  minds  will  he  succeed 
in  producing  conviction  ?  Or  who,  again,  in  dealing  with  questions  of 
such  subtle  nicety  as  these,  can  secure  himself  against  a  dangerous  de- 
clension from  the  truth  ?  It  is  incumbent,  therefore,  on  us  in  these 
cases  to  be  sparing  of  our  words,  lest,  in  case  we  ourselves  are  unable, 
through  the  feebleness  of  our  natural  faculties,  to  give  a  clear  explana- 
tion of  the  subject  before  us,  or,  on  the  other  hand,  in  case  the  slow- 
ness of  our  hearers'  understandings  disables  them  from  arriving  at  an 
accurate  apprehension  of  what  we  say,  from  one  or  other  of  these 
causes  we  reduce  the  people  to  the  alternative  either  of  blasphemy  or 
schism. 

"  Let  therefore  both  the  unguarded  questions  and  the  inconsiderate 
answer  receive  your  mutual  forgiveness.  For  your  difference  has  not 
arisen  on  any  leading  doctrines  or  precepts  of  the  divine  law,  nor  have 
you  introduced  any  new  dogma  respecting  the  worship  of  God.  You 
are  in  truth  of  one  and  the  same  judgment  :  you  may  therefore  well  join 
in  that  communion  which  is  the  symbol  of  united  fellowship. 


340      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIG  FAITH. 

"  For  as  long  as  you  continue  to  contend  about  these  truly  insignifi- 
cant questions,  it  is  not  fitting  that  so  large  a  portion  of  God's  people 
should  be  under  the  direction  of  your  judgment,  since  you  are  thus 
divided  between  yourselves.  I  believe  it  indeed  to  be  not  merely  unbe- 
coming, but  positively  evil,  that  such  should  be  the  case.  But  I  will 
appeal  to  your  good  sense  by  a  familiar  instance  to  illustrate  my  mean- 
ing :  You  know  that  philosophers,  while  they  all  adhere  to  the  general 
tenets  of  their  respective  sects,  are  frequently  at  issue  on  some  particular 
assertion  or  statement  :  and  yet,  though  they  may  differ  as  to  the  perfec- 
tion of  a  principle,  they  are  recalled  to  harmony  of  sentiment  by  the 
uniting  power  of  their  common  doctrines.  If  this  be  true,  is  it  not  far 
more  reasonable  that  you,  who  are  the  ministers  of  the  supreme  God, 
should  be  of  one  mind  respecting  the  profession  of  the  same  religion  ? 

"But  let  us  still  more  thoughtfully  and  with  closer  attention  examine 
what  I  have  said,  and  see  whether  it  be  right  that,  on  the  ground  of 
some  trifling  and  foolish  verbal  difference  between  ourselves,  brethren 
should  assume  towards  each  other  the  attitude  of  enemies,  and  the 
august  meeting  of  the  synod  be  rent  by  profane  disunion,  because  we 
will  wrangle  together  on  points  so  trivial  and  altogether  unessential. 
Surely  this  conduct  is  unworthy  of  us,  and  rather  characteristic  of  child- 
ish ignorance,  than  consistent  with  the  wisdom  of  priests  and  men  of 
sense.  Let  us  withdraw  ourselves  with  a  good  will  from  these  tempta- 
tions of  the  devil.  Our  great  God  and  common  Saviour  has  granted  the 
same  light  to  us  all.  Permit  me,  who  am  his  servant,  to  bring  my  task 
to  a  successful  issue,  under  the  direction  of  his  Providence,  that  I  may 
be  enabled  through  my  exhortations,  and  diligence,  and  earnest  admoni- 
tion, to  recall  his  people  to  the  fellowship  of  one  communion.  For 
since  you  have,  as  I  said,  but  one  faith,  and  one  sentiment  respecting 
our  religion,  and  since  the  divine  commandment  in  all  its  parts  enjoins 
on  us  all  the  duty  of  maintaining  a  spirit  of  concord,  let  not  the  circum- 
stance which  has  led  to  a  slight  difference  between  you,  since  it  affects 
not  the  general  principles  of  truth,  be  allowed  to  prolong  any  division 
or  schism  among  you. 

"And  this  I  say  without  in  any  way  desiring  to  force  you  to  entire 
unity  of  judgment  in  regard  to  this  truly  idle  question,  whatever  its  real 
nature  may  be.  For  the  dignity  of  your  synod  may  be  preserved,  and 
the  communion  of  your  whole  body  maintained  unbroken,  however  wide 
a  difference  may  exist  among  you  as  to  unimportant  matters.  For  we 
are  not  all  of  us  like-minded  on  every  subject,  nor  is  there  such  a  thing 
as  one  disposition  and  judgment  common  to  all  alike.  As  far  then  as 
regards  the  divine  Providence,  let  there  be  one  faith,  and  one  under- 
standing among  you,  one  united  judgment  in  reference  to  God.  But  as 
to  your  subtle  disputations  on  questions  of  little  or  no  significance, 


THE  COUNCIL   OF  NICE.  341 

though  you  may  be  unable  to  harmonize  in  sentiment,  such  differences 
should  be  consigned  to  the  secret  custody  of  your  own  mind  and 
thoughts.  And  now  let  the  precious  bonds  of  common  affection,  let 
faith  in  the  truth,  let  the  honor  due  to  God,  and  the  observance  of  his 
law,  continue  immovably  established  among  you.  Resume,  then,  your 
mutual  feelings  of  affection  and  regard  ;  permit  the  whole  body  of  the 
people  once  more  to  unite  in  that  embrace  which  should  be  natural  to 
all  :  and  do  ye  yourselves,  having  purified  your  souls,  as  it  were,  from 
every  angry  thought,  once  more  return  to  your  former  fellowship.  For 
it  often  happens  that  when  a  reconciliation  is  affected  by  the  removal  of 
the  causes  of  enmity,  friendship  becomes  even  sweeter  than  it  was 
before. 

"  Restore  me  then  my  quiet  days  and  untroubled  nights,  that  hence- 
forth the  joy  of  light  undimmed  by  sorrow,  the  delight  of  a  tranquil 
life,  may  continue  to  be  my  portion.  Else  must  I  needs  mourn,  with 
copious  and  constant  tears,  nor  shall  I  be  able  to  pass  the  residue  of  my 
days  without  disquietude.  For  while  the  people  of  God,  whose  fellow- 
servant  I  am,  are  thus  divided  amongst  themselves  by  an  unreasonable 
and  pernicious  spirit  of  contention,  how  is  it  possible  that  I  shall  be  able 
to  maintain  tranquillity  of  mind  ?  And  I  will  give  you  a  proof  how  great 
my  sorrow  has  been  on  this  behalf.  Not  long  since  I  had  visited  Nico- 
media,  and  intended  forthwith  to  proceed  from  that  city  to  the  East.  It 
was  while  I  was  on  the  point  of  hastening  towards  you,  and  was  already 
among  you  in  thought  and  desire,  that  the  news  of  this  matter  arrested 
my  intended  progress,  that  I  might  not  be  compelled  to  witness  that 
which  I  felt  myself  scarcely  able  even  to  hear.  Open  then  for  me 
henceforward  by  your  unity  of  judgment  that  road  to  the  regions  of  the 
East  which  your  dissensions  have  closed  against  me,  and  permit  me 
speedily  to  see  the  happiness  both  of  yourselves  and  of  all  other  prov- 
inces, and  to  render  due  acknowledgment  to  God  in  the  language  of 
praise  and  thanksgiving  for  the  restoration  of  general  concord  and 
liberty  to  all."11 

This  letter  he  sent  by  the  hand  of  Hosius,  whom  he 
made  his  ambassador  to  reconcile  the  disputants.  But  both 
the  letter  and  the  mission  of  Hosius  were  in  vain  ;  and  yet 
the  more  so,  by  the  very  fact  that  the  parties  were  now 
assured  that  the  controversy  had  attracted  the  interested 
attention  of  the  imperial  authority.  As  imperial  favor, 
imperial  patronage,  and  imperial  power,  were  the  chief 
objects  of  the  contest ;  and  as  this  effort  of  the  emperor 
showed  that  the  reward  was  almost  within  the  grasp  of 

11  Eusebius's  "Life  of  Constantine,"  book  ii,  chaps.  Ixv-lxxil. 
28 


342        ESTABLISHMENT   OF   THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

whichever  party  might  prove  successful ;  the  contention  was 
deepened  rather  than  abated. 

It  had  already  been  decided  that  the  imperial  favor  and 
patronage  was  for  the  Catholic  Church.  Each  of  these  par- 
ties claimed  to  be  the  orthodox  and  only  Catholic  Church. 
The  case  of  the  Donatists  had  been  referred  to  a  council  of 
bishops  for  adjudication.  It  was  but  natural  that  this  ques- 
tion should  be  treated  in  the  same  way.  But  whereas  the 
case  of  the  Donatists  affected  only  a  very  small  portion  of 
the  empire,  this  question  directly  involved  the  whole  East, 
and  greatly  concerned  much  of  the  West.  More  than  this, 
the  Catholic  religion  was  now  the  religion  of  the  empire. 
This  dispute  was  upon  the  question  as  to  what  is  the  truth  of 
the  Catholic  religion.  Therefore  if  the  question  was  to  be 
settled,  it  must  be  settled  for  the  whole  empire.  These 
considerations  demanded  a  general  council.  Therefore,  a 
general  council  was  called,  A.  L>.  325,  which  met  at  the  city 
of  Nice,  the  latter  part  of  May  or  the  first  part  of  June, 
in  that  year. 

The  number  of  bishops  that  composed  the  council  was 
three  hundred  and  eighteen,  while  the  number  of  "the  pres- 
byters and  deacons,  in  their  train,  and  the  crowd  of  acolytes 
and  other  attendants,  was  altogether  beyond  computation  " 
(Eusebiusn\  all  of  whom  traveled, and  were  entertained  to 
and  from  the  council  and  while  there,  at  the  public  expense. 
"They  came  as  fast  as  they  could  run,  in  almost  a  frenzy  of 
excitement  and  enthusiasm  ;  the  actual  crowd  must  have 
been  enough  to  have  metamorphosed  the  place."  And 
"shrill  above  all  other  voices,  vehement  above  all  other 
disputants,  '  brandishing  their  arguments  like  spears,  against 
those  who  sat  under  the  same  roof  and  ate  off  the  same 
tables  as  themselves,'  were  the  combatants  from  Alexandria, 
who  had  brought  to  its  present  pass  the  question  which  the 
council  was  called  to  decide."--  Stanley. n 

12  Id.,  book  iii,  chap.  viii. 

13  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  iii,  par.  22, 


CHARACTER   OF   THE  BISHOPS.  343 

The  emperor  did  not  arrive  at  Nice  for  several  days  after 
the  others  had  reached  that  place  ;  but  when  he  came,  "He 
had  no  sooner  taken  up  his  quarters  in  the  palace  of  Nicsea, 
than  he  found  showered  in  upon  him  a  number  of  parchment 
rolls,  or  letters,  containing  complaints  and  petitions  against 
each  other  from  the  larger  part  of  the  assembled  bishops. 
We  cannot  ascertain  with  certainty  whether  they  were  col- 
lected in  a  single  day,  or  went  on  accumulating  day  after 
day.  It  was  a  poor  omen  for  the  unanimity  which  he  had 
so  much  at  heart.  .  .  .  We  are  expressly  told  both  by 
Eusebius  and  Sozomen,  that  one  motive  which  had  drawn 
many  to  the  council  was  the  hope  of  settling  their  own  pri- 
vate concerns,  and  promoting  their  own  private  interests. 
.  .  .  There,  too,  were  the  pent-up  grudges  and  quarrels  of 
years,  which  now  for  the  first  time  had  an  opportunity  of 
making  themselves  heard.  Never  before  had  these  remote, 
often  obscure,  ministers  of  a  persecuted  sect  come  within 
the  range  of  imperial  power.  He  whose  presence  was  for 
the  first  time  so  close  to  them,  bore  the  same  authority  of 
which  the  apostle  had  said  that  it  was  the  supreme  earthly 
distributer  of  justice  to  mankind.  Still  after  all  due  allow- 
ance, it  is  impossible  not  to  share  in  the  emperor's  astonish- 
ment that  this  should  have  been  the  first  act  of  the  first 
(Ecumenical  Assembly  of  the  Christian  Church." — Stanley. ,u 

14  7d.,  Lecture  iv,  par.  2,  3.  I  take  this  occasion  to  remark  that  which  has 
already  become  apparent,  and  which  becomes  more  and  more  emphatic  as  the 
history  proceeds,  that  the  term  "Christian"  in  such  connection  as  it  is  here  used 
by  Stanley,  is  totally  misapplied.  This  was  not  an  assembly  of  the  Christian 
Church  ;  it  was  not  the  Christian  Church  that  united  with  the  State.  This  was 
an  assembly  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  it  was  the  Catholic  Church  that  formed  the 
union  with  the  State.  The  history  of  "  the  church  "  is  not  the  history  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  history  of  Christianity  has  not  been  written  except  by  the  rack,  by 
sword,  and  by  flame  ;  in  tears,  in  sufferings,  and  in  blood, —  and  in  the  books  that 
shall  be  opened  at  the  last  day.  Faithfulness  to  the  authors  whom  I  quote  will 
oblige  me  in  a  few  instances  to  copy  this  misapplication  of  the  word  "Christian." 
But  the  reader  will  need  merely  to  note  the  connection  to  see  that  the  word  is 
sadly  misused,  and  this  note  will  be  the  assurance  in  every  such  case  that  I  do 
not  indorse  the  use  of  the  word  in  anv  such  connection. 


344:        ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

The  council  met  in  a  large  hall  in  the  palace  of  the  em- 
peror, which  had  been  arranged  for  the  purpose.  In  the 
center  of  the  room  on  a  kind  of  throne,  was  placed  a  copy 
of  the  gospels  ;  at  one  end  of  the  hall  was  placed  a  richly 
carved  throne,  which  was  to  be  occupied  by  Constantine. 
The  day  came  for  the  formal  opening  of  the  assembly.  The 
bishops  were  all  assembled  with  their  accompanying  presby- 
ters and  deacons  ;  but  as  it  was  an  imperial  council,  it  could 
not  be  opened  but  by  the  emperor  himself ;  and  they  waited 
in  silence  for  him  to  come.  "  At  last  a  signal  from  without 
—  probably  a  torch  raised  by  the  '  cursor'  or  avant-courier  — 
announced  that  the  emperor  was  close  at  hand.  The  whole 
assembly  rose  and  stood  on  their  feet ;  and  then  for  the  first 
time  set  their  admiring  gaze  on  Constantine,  the  conqueror, 
the  august,  the  great. 

"He  entered.  His  towering  stature,  his  strong-built 
frame,  his  broad  shoulders,  his  handsome  features,  were  wor- 
thy of  his  grand  position.  There  was  a  brightness  in  his  look 
and  mingled  expression  of  fierceness  and  gentleness  in  his 
lion-like  eye,  which  well  became  one  who,  as  Augustus  be- 
fore him,  had  fancied,  and  perhaps  still  fancied,  himself  to 
be  the  favorite  of  the  sun-god  Apollo.  The  bishops  were  fur- 
ther struck  by  the  dazzling,  perhaps  barbaric,  magnificence 
of  his  dress.  Always  careful  of  his  appearance,  he  was  so 
on  this  occasion  in  an  eminent  degree.  His  long  hair,  false 
or  real,  was  crowned  with  the  imperial  diadem  of  pearls. 
His  purple  or  scarlet  robe  blazed  with  precious  stones  and 
gold  embroidery.  He  was  shod  no  doubt  in  the  scarlet 
shoes  then  confined  to  emperors,  now  perpetuated  in  the 
pope  and  cardinals.  Many  of  the  bishops. had  probably 
never  seen  any  greater  functionary  than  a  remote  provincial 
magistrate,  and  gazing  at  his  splendid  figure  as  he  passed 
up  the  hall  between  their  ranks,  remembering  too  what  he 
had  done  for  their  faith  and  for  their  church, —  we  may  well 
believe  that  the  simple  and  the  worldly  both  looked  upon 


CONST ANTINE'S  PLACE  IN  THE   COUNCIL.         345 

him,  as  though  lie  were  an  angel  of  God,  descended  straight 
from  heaven." — Stanley.™ 

He  paraded  thus  up  the  whole  length  of  the  hall  to  where 
the  seat  of  wrought  gold  had  been  set  for  him  ;  then  he 
turned,  facing  the  assembly,  and  pretended  to  be  so  abashed 
by  the  presence  of  so  much  holiness,  that  he  would  not  take 
his  seat  until  the  bishops  had  signalled  to  him  to  do  so  ;  then 
he  sat  down,  and  the  others  followed  suit.  On  one  side 
of  Constantine  sat  Hosius,  on  the  other,  Eusebius.  As  soon 
as  all  had  taken  their  seats  after  the  entrance  of  Constantine, 
Eusebius  arose  and  delivered  an  oration  in  honor  of  the 
emperor,  closing  with  a  hymn  of  thanksgiving  to  God,  for 
Constantino's  final  victory  over  Licinius.  Eusebius  resumed 
his  seat,  and  Constantine  arose  and  delivered  to  the  assembly 
the  following  address  :  — 

"It  has,  my  friends,  been  the  object  of  my  highest  wishes,  to  enjoy 
your  sacred  company,  and  having  obtained  this,  I  confess  my  thankfulness 
to  the  King  of  all,  that  in  addition  to  all  my  other  blessings,  he  has  granted 
to  me  this  greatest  of  all  —  I  mean,  to  receive  you  all  assembled  together, 
and  to  see  one  common,  harmonious  opinion  of  all.  Let,  then,  no  en- 
vious enemy  injure  our  happiness,  and  after  the  destruction  of  the  im- 
pious power  of  the  tyrants  by  the  might  of  God  our  Saviour,  let  not  the 
spirit  of  evil  overwhelm  the  divine  law  with  blasphemies  ;  for  to  me  far 
worse  than  any  war  or  battle  is  the  civil  war  of  the  church  of  God  ;  yes, 
far  more  painful  than  the  wars  which  have  raged,  without.  As,  then,  by 
the  assent  and  co-operation  of  a  higher  power  I  have  gained  my  victo- 
ries over  my  enemies,  I  thought  that  nothing  remained  but  to  give  God 
thanks,  and  to  rejoice  with  those  who  have  been  delivered  by  us.  But 
since  I  learned  of  your  divisions,  contrary  to  all  expectations,  I  gave  the 
report  my  first  consideration  ;  and  praying  that  this  also  might  be  healed 
through  my  assistance,  I  called  you  all  together  without  delay.  I  re- 
joice at  the  mere  sight  of  your  assembly  ;  but  the  moment  that  I  shall 
consider  the  chief  fulfillment  of  my  prayers,  will  be  when  I  see  you  all 
joined  together  in  heart  and  soul,  and  determining  on  one  peaceful  har- 
mony for  all,  which  it  should  well  become  you  who  are  consecrated  to 
God,  to  preach  to  others.  Do  not,  then,  delay,  my  friends  ;  do  not 
delay,  ministers  of  .God,  and  good  servants  of  our  common  Lord  and 
Saviour,  to  remove  all  grounds  of  difference,  and  to  wind  up  by  laws  of 

15  Id.,  par.  4. 


346       ESTABLISIDfENT  OF   THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

peace  every  link  of  controversy.  Thus  will  you  have  done  what  is  most 
pleasing  to  the  God  who  is  over  all,  and  you  will  render  the  greatest 
boon  to  me,  your  fellow-servant."  16 

Thus  the  council  was  formally  opened,  and  then  the 
emperor  signified  to  the  judges  of  the  assembly  to  go  on 
with  the  proceedings.  "  From  this  moment  the  flood-gates 
of  debate  were  opened  wide  ;  and  from  side  to  side  recrimi- 
nations and  accusations  were  bandied  to  and  fro,  without 
regard  to  the  imperial  presence.  He  remained  unmoved 
amid  the  clatter  of  angry  voices,  turning  from  one  side  of 
the  hall  to  the  other,  giving  his  whole  attention  to  the  ques- 
tions proposed,  bringing  together  the  violent  partisans." 
Stanley.11  To  end  their  personal  spites,  and  turn  their 
whole  attention  to  the  question  which  was  to  come  properly 
before  the  assembly,  he  took  from  the  folds  of  his  mantle 
the  whole  bundle  of  their  complaints  and  recriminations 
against  one  another,  which  they  had  submitted  to  him 
immediately  upon  his  arrival.  He  laid  the  bundle  out  be- 
fore the  assembly  bound  up,  and  sealed  with  the  imperial 
ring.  Then,  after  stating  that  he  had  not  read  one  of  them, 
he  ordered  a  brazier  to  be  brought  in,  and  at  once  burned 
them  in  the  presence  of  the  whole  assembly.  As  they  were 
burning,  he  addressed  the  authors  of  them  in  the  following 
words  :  — 

"  'You  have  been  made  by  God  priests  and  rulers,  to  judge  and  de- 
cide, .  .  .  and  have  even  been  made  gods,  so  highly  raised  as  you  are 
above  men  ;  for  it  is  written,  "I  have  said  ye  are  gods,  and  ye  are  all 
the  children  of  the  Most  High  ; "  "  and  God  stood  in  the  congregation  of 
the  gods,  and  in  the  midst  he  judges  the  gods."  You  ought  really  to 
neglect  these  common  matters,  and  devote  yourselves  to  the  things  of 
God.  It  is  not  for  me  to  judge  of  what  awaits  the  judgment  of  God 
only.'  And  as  the  libels  vanished  into  ashes,  he  urged  them,  'Never  to 
let  the  faults  of  men  in  their  consecrated  offices  be  publicly  known  to 
the  scandal  and  temptation  of  the  multitude.'  '  Nay,' he  added,  doubt- 
less spreading  out  the  folds  of  his  imperial  mantle  as  he  spoke,  'even 
though  I  were  with  my  own  eyes  to  see  a  bishop  in  the  act  of  gross  sin, 
I  would  throw  my  purple  robe  over  him,  that  no  one  might  suffer  from 
the  sight  of  such  a  crime.'  "  18 

16  Stanley,  Id.,  par.  6.  17/</.,  par.  9.  18  Id.,  par.  9. 


THE  FRAMING   OF   THE  CREED.  347 

Then  the  grcut  question  that  had  caused  the  calling  of  the 
council  was  taken  up.  There  were  three  parties  in  the  coun- 
cil —  those  who  sided  with  Alexander,  those  who  sided  with 
Arius,  and  those  who  were  non-committal,  or,  through  hope 
of  being  mediators,  held  the  middle  ground.  Arius,  not 
being  a  bishop,  could  not  hold  an  official  seat  in  the  council, 
but  he  had  come  at  the  express  command  of  Constantine, 
and  "was  frequently  called  upon  to  express  his  opinions."" 
Athanasius,  who  was  more  responsible  for  the  present  con- 
dition of  the  dispute  than  was  Alexander  himself,  though 
only  a  deacon,  came  with  his  bishop  Alexander.  He,  like- 
wise, though  not  entitled  to  an  official  place  in  the  council, 
played  not  a  small  part  in  the  discussion  and  in  bringing 
about  the  final  result  of  the  council. 

The  party  of  Alexander  and  Athanasius,  it  was  soon  dis- 
covered, could  depend  upon  the  majority  of  the  council  ;  and 
they  determined  to  use  this  power  in  the  formulation  of  such 
a  statement  of  doctrine  as  would  suit  themselves  first,  and 
if  it  should  be  found  impossible  for  the  party  of  Arius  hon- 
estly to  accept  it,  so  much  the  better  they  would  be  pleased. 

In  the  discussion,  some  of  the  songs  which  Arius  had 
written,  were  read.  As  soon  as  Alexander's  party  heard 
them,  they  threw  up  their  hands  in  horror,  and  then  clapped 
them  'upon  their  ears  and  shut  their  eyes,  that  they  might 
not  be  defiled  with  the  fearful  heresy. 

Next  the  draft  of  a  creed  was  brought  in,  signed  by 
eighteen  bishops  of  the  party  of  Arius  ;  but  it  was  not  suf- 
fered to  exist  long  enough  for  anybody  ever  to  obtain  a 
copy.  Their  opponents  broke  into  a  wild  uproar,  tore  the 
document  to  pieces,  and  expelled  Arius  from  the  assembly. 

Next,  Eusebius  of  Caesarea, — Constantine's  panegyrist 
—  thought  to  bring  the  parties  together  by  presenting  a  creed 
that  had  been  largely  in  use  before  this  dispute  ever  arose. 
He  stated  that  this  confession  of  faith  was  one  which  he  had 
learned  in  his  childhood,  from  the  bishop  of  Csesarea,  and 
one  which  he  accepted  at  his  baptism,  and  which  he  had 


348      ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

taught  through  his  whole  career,  both  as  a  presbyter  and  as 
a  bishop.  As  an  additional  argument,  and  one  which  he 
intended  to  be  of  great  weight  in  the  council,  he  declared 
that  "  it  had  been  approved  by  the  emperor,  the  beloved  of 
heaven,  who  had  already  seen  it."  It  read  as  follows  :  — 

"I  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of  all  things 
both  visible  and  invisible,  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Word  of 
God,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  Life  of  Life,  the  only  begotten  Son, 
the  First-born  of  every  creature,  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all 
worlds,  by  whom  also  all  things  were  made.  Who  for  our  salvation 
was  made  flesh,  and  lived  amongst  men,  and  suffered,  and  rose  again  on 
the  third  day,  and  ascended  to  the  Father,  and  shall  come  in  glory  to 
judge  the  quick  and  the  dead.  And  we  believe  in  one  Holy  Ghost.  Be- 
lieving each  of  them  to  be  and  to  have  existed,  the  Father,  only  the  Father ; 
and  the  Son,  only  the  Son  ;  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  only  the  Holy  Ghost :  as 
also  our  Lord  sending  forth  his  own  disciples  to  preach,  said,  '  Go  and 
teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost : '  concerning  which  things  we  affirm  that  it 
is  so,  and  that  we  so  think,  and  that  it  has  long  so  been  held,  and  that 
we  remain  steadfast  to  death  for  this  faith,  anathematizing  every  godless 
heresy.  That  we  have  thought  these  things  from  our  heart  and  soul, 
from  the  time  that  we  have  known  ourselves,  and  that  we  now  think  and 
say  thus  in  truth,  we  testify  in  the  name  of  Almighty  God,  and  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  being  able  to  prove  even  by  demonstration,  and  to 
persuade  you  that  in  the  past  times  also  thus  we  believed  and  preached."  19 

As  soon  as  this  was  read  in  the  council,  the  party  of 
Arius  all  signified  their  willingness  to  subscribe  to  it.  But 
this  did  not  suit  the  party  of  Alexander  and  Athanasius  ;  it 
was  rather  the  very  thing  that  they  did  not  want,  for  ''they 
were  determined  to  find  some  form  of  words  which  no  Arian 
could  receive."  They  hunted  about,  therefore,  for  some 
point  or  some  word,  upon  which  they  could  reject  it.  It 
will  be  noticed  that  this  creed  says  nothing  about  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Son  of  God,  while  that  was  the  very  question 
which  had  brought  the  council  together.  Eusebius,  bishop 
of  Nicomedia,  was  chief  of  the  Arians  who  held  seat* 
in  the  council.  At  this  point  a  letter  was  brought  forth. 

19  7(7.,   par.  22. 


THE  CREED  AND  ITS  ADOPTION.  349 

which  he  had  formerly  written,  in  which  he  had  stated  that 
"to  assert  the  Son  to  be  uncreated,  would  be  to  say  that  he 
was  'of  one  substance'  —  Ilomoousion  —  with  the  Father, 
and  to  say  that  '  He  was  of  one  substance  '  was  a  proposition 
evidently  absurd." 

This  gave  to  the  party  of  Alexander  and  Athanasius  the 
very  opportunity  which  they  desired  ;  it  supplied  from  the 
opposite  party  the  very  word  upon  which  they  had  all  the 
time  insisted,  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  that  party  had  de- 
clared that  the  use  of  the  word  in  that  connection  was  evi- 
dently absurd.  If  they,  therefore,  should  insist  upon  the 
use  of  that  very  word,  it  would  certainly  exclude  the  Arian 
party.  "  The  letter  produced  a  violent  excitement.  There 
was  the  very  test  of  which  they  were  in  search  ;  the  letter 
was  torn  in  pieces  to  mark  their  indignation,  and  the  phrase 
which  he  had  pledged  himself  to  reject,  became  the  phrase 
which  they  pledged  themselves  to  adopt." — Stanley.™ 

As  Constantine  had  approved  the  creed  already  read  by 
Eusebius,  the  question  of  the  party  of  Alexander  now  was 
whether  he  would  approve  it  with  the  addition  of  this  word, 
and  the  hopes  of  both  parties  now  hung  trembling  upon  the 
emperor.  Hosius  and  his  associates,  having  the  last  consul- 
tation with  him,  brought  him  over  to  their  side.  At  the 
next  meeting  of  the  assembly,  he  again  presented  the  creed 
of  Eusebius,  approved  it,  and  called  upon  all  to  adopt  it. 
Seeing,  however,  that  the  majority  would  not  accept  the 
creed  of  Eusebius  as  it  was,  Constantine  decided  to  "gain 
the  assent  of  the  orthodox,  that  is,  the  most  powerful,  part 
of  the  assembly,"  by  inserting  the  disputed  word.  "He 
trusted  that  by  this  insertion  they  might  be  gained,  and  yet 
that,  under  the  pressure  of  fear  and  favor,  the  others  might 
not  be  altogether  repelled.  He  therefore  took  the  course 
the  most  likely  to  secure  this  result,  and  professed  himself 
the  patron  and  also  the  interpreter  of  the  new  phrase. "- 
Stanley.™ 

wld.,  par.  23.  al  M,  par.  28. 


350       ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE   CATHOLIO  FAITH. 

Constantine  ordered  the  addition  of  the  disputed  word. 
The  party  of  Alexander  and  Athanasius,  now  assured  of 
the  authority  of  the  emperor,  required  the  addition  of  other 
phrases  to  the  same  purpose,  so  that  when  the  creed  was 
finally  written  out  in  full,  it  read  as  follows  :  — 

"We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  all  things 
both  visible  and  invisible. 

"And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the 
Father,  only  begotten,  that  is  to  say,  of  the  substance  of  the  Father, 
God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made, 
being  of  one  substance  with  the  Father,  by  whom  all  things  were  made, 
both  things  in  heaven  and  things  in  earth  ;  who  for  us  men,  and  for 
our  salvation,  came  down,  and  was  made  flesh,  and  was  made  man,  suf- 
fered, and  rose  again  on  the  third  day,  went  up  into  the  heavens,  and  is 
to  come  again  to  judge  the  quick  and  dead. 

"And  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  But  those  that  say,  '  There  was  when  he  was  not,'  and  '  Before  he 
was  begotten  he  was  not/  and  that  '  he  came  into  existence  from  what 
was  not,'  or  who  profess  that  the  Son  of  God  is  of  a  different  '  person 
or  '  substance,'  or  that  he  is  created,  or  changeable,  or  variable,  are 
anathematized  by  the  Catholic  Church."22 

Thus  came  the  original  Nicene  Creed.  Constantine's 
influence  carried  with  it  many  in  the  council,  but  seventeen 
bishops  refused  to  subscribe  to  it.  The  emperor  then  com- 
manded all  to  sign  it  under  penalty  of  banishment.  This 
brought  to  terms  all  of  them  but  five.  Eusebius  of  Csesarea, 
the  panegyrist  and  one  of  the  counselors  of  Constantine, 
took  a  whole  day  to  ''deliberate."  In  his  deliberation  he 
consulted  the  emperor,  who  so  explained  the  term  Ilomoou- 
sion  that  it  could  be  understood  as  Ilomoiousion.  He  "de- 
clared that  the  word,  as  he  understood  it,  involved  no  such 
material  unity  of  the  persons  of  the  God-head  as  Eusebius 
feared  might  be  deduced  from  it."-—  Stanley.™  In  this 
sense,  therefore,  Eusebius  adopted  the  test,  and  subscribed  to 
the  creed. 

Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  and  Theognis  of  Nice  subscribed 
to  the  body  of  the  creed,  but  refused  to  subscribe  to  the 
curse  which  it  pronounced  upon  the  Arian  doctrines.  Sen- 

K  Id,,  par   29.  23  Id.,  par.  34. 


THEIR   OWN  ESTIMATE   OF   THE   CREED.  351 

tence  of  banishment  was  pronounced  ;  then  they  yielded 
and  subscribed,  yet  they  were  removed  from  their  bishop- 
rics, and  Catholics  were  put  in  their  places.  Two  of  the 
other  bishops,  however, —  Theonas  of  Marmarica  in  Libya, 
and'Secundus  of  Ptolemais, —  absolutely  refused  from  first 
to  last  to  sign  the  creed,  and  they  were  banished.  As  for 
Arius,  he  seems  to  have  departed  from  Nice  soon  after  he 
was  expelled  from  the  council.  Sentence  of  banishment 
was  pronounced  against  him  with  the  others.  But  as  he 
was  the  chief  expositor  of  the  condemned  doctrines,  Con- 
stantine published  against  him  the  following  edict :  — 

"  Victor  Constantine  Maximus  Augustus,  to  the  bishops  and  people  : 
Since  Arius  has  imitated  wicked  and  impious  persons,  it  is  Just  that  he 
should  undergo  the  like  ignominy.  Wherefore  as  Porphyry,  that  enemy 
of  piety,  for  having  composed  licentious  treatises  against  religion,  found 
a  suitable  recompense,  and  such  as  thenceforth  branded  him  with 
infamy,  overwhelming  him  with  deserved  reproach,  his  impious  writings 
also  having  been  destroyed  ;  so  now  it  seems  fit  both  that  Arius  and 
such  as  hold  his  sentiments  should  be  denominated  Porphyrians,  that 
they  may  take  their  appellation  from  those  whose  conduct  they  have 
imitated.  And  in  addition  to  this,  if  any  treatise  composed  by  Arius 
should  be  discovered,  let  it  be  consigned  to  the  flames,  in  order  that  not 
only  his  depraved  doctrine  may  be  suppressed,  but  also  that  no  memo- 
rial of  him  may  be  by  any  means  left.  This  therefore  I  decree,  that  if 
any  one  shall  be  detected  in  concealing  a  book  compiled  by  Arius,  and 
shall  not  instantly  bring  it  forward  and  burn  it,  the  penalty  for  this 
offense  shall  be  death  ;  for  immediately  after  conviction  the  criminal 
shall  suffer  capital  punishment.  May  God  preserve  you."24 

' '  His  book,  '  Thalia, '  was  burnt  on  the  spot ;  and  this 
example  was  so  generally  followed,  that  it  became  a  very 
rare  work."  —  Stanley.™  The  decree  banishing  Arius  was 
shortly  so  modified  as  simply  to  prohibit  his  returning  to 
Alexandria. 

When  the  council  finally  closed  its  labors,  Constantine 
gave,  in  honor  of  the  bishops,  the  grand  banquet  before 
mentioned,  in  which  it  was  pretended  that  the  kingdom  of 
God  was  come,  and  at  which  he  loaded  them  with  presents. 

24  Socrates's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap.  ix. 
26 "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  iv,  par.  39. 


352      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

He  then  exhorted  them  to  unity  and  forbearance,  and  dis- 
missed them  to  return  to  their  respective  places. 

It  was  intended  that  the  decision  of  this  council,  in  the 
creed  adopted,  should  put  an  end  forever  to  all  religious 
differences.  "It  is  certain  that  the  Creed  of  Nicsea  was 
meant  to  be  an  end  of  theological  controversy."  —  Stanley.9* 
Constantine  published  it  as  the  inspiration  of  God.  In  a 
letter  to  the  "Catholic  Church  of  the  Alexandrians,"  an- 
nouncing the  decision  of  the  council,  he  said  :  — 

"That  which  has  commended  itself  to  the  judgment  of  three  hundred 
bishops  cannot  be  other  than  the  doctrine  of  God  ;  seeing  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  dwelling  in  the  minds  of  so  many  dignified  persons  has  effectually 
enlightened  them  respecting  the  divine  will.  Wherefore  let  no  one 
vacillate  or  linger,  but  let  all  with  alacrity  return  to  the  undoubted  path 
of  duty."26 

Another,  expressing  the  views  of  the  Catholic  Church  in 
this  same  century,  ascribes  absolute  and  irresistible  infalli- 
bility to  the  decisions  of  the  council.  He  flatly  declares 
that  even  if  those  who  composed  the  council  had  been 
"idiots,  yet,  as  being  illuminated  by  God  and  the  grace  of 
his  Holy  Spirit,  they  were  utterly  unable  to  err  from  the 
truth."  —  Socrates.1"  And  Athanasius  declared  :  — 

"  The  word  of  the  Lord,  which  was  given  in  the  (Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil of  Nicsea,  remaineth  forever."  Z8 

Those  who  had  formed  the  creed  were  exalted  as  the 
Fathers  of  Nicsea,  and  then  to  the  creed  was  applied  the 
scripture,  "Remove  not  the  ancient  landmark  which  thy 
fathers  have  set." :  From  that  time  forth  the  words,  "Stand 
by  the  landmark,"  were  considered  a  sufficient  watchword  to 
put  every  Catholic  on  his  guard  against  the  danger  of  heresy. 
"From  this  period  we  may  date  the  introduction  of  rigorous 
articles  of  belief,  which  required  the  submissive  assent  of  the 
mind  to  every  word  and  letter  of  an  established  creed,  and 

25 Id.,  par.  41.          26Socrates's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  1,  chap.  ix. 

27  Id. 

28 Stanley,  "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  iv,  par.  41.        z9 Id. 


THE   TRUE  ESTIMATE  OF   THE  COUNCIL.          353 

which  raised  the  slightest  heresy  of  opinion  into  a  more  fatal 
offense  against  God,  and  a  more  odious  crime  in  the  estima- 
tion of  man,  than  the  worst  moral  delinquency  or  the  most 
flagrant  deviation  from  the  spirit  of  Christianity."  —  Mil- 
man.so 

In  the  unanimity  of  opinion  attained  by  the  council, 
however,  the  idea  of  inspiration  from  any  source  other  than 
Constantino,  is  a  myth,  and  even  that  was  a  vanishing  quan- 
tity, because  a  considerable  number  of  those  who  sub- 
scribed to  the  creed,  did  so  against  their  honest  convictions, 
and  with  the  settled  determination  to  secure  a  revision  or  a 
reversal  just  as  soon  as  it  could  possibly  be  brought  about : 
and  to  bring  it  about  they  would  devote  every  waking 
moment  of  their  lives. 

Yet  more  than  this,  this  theory  proceeds  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  religious  truth  and  doctrine  are  subject  to  the 
decision  of  the  majority,  than  which  nothing  could  possibly 
be  farther  from  the  truth.  Even  though  the  decision  of  the 
Council  of  Nicsea  had  been  absolutely,  and  from  honest  con- 
viction spontaneously,  unanimous,  it  never  could  rest  with 
the  slightest  degree  of  obligation  or  authority  upon  any 
soul,  who  had  not  arrived  at  the  same  conclusion  from  hon- 
est conviction  derived  from  the  free  exercise  of  his  own 
power  of  thought.  There  is  no  organization,  nor  tribunal, 
on  earth  that  has  any  right  to  decide  for  anybody  what  is 
the  truth  upon  any  religious  question.  "The  head  of  every 
man  is  Christ."  1  Cor.  xi,  3.  "One  is  your  Master,  even 
Christ."  Matt,  xxiii,  8.  "Who  art  thou  that  judgest  an- 
other man's  servant '?  to  his  own  master  he  standeth  or  fall- 
eth.  ...  So  then  every  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of 
himself  to  God."  Horn,  xiv,  4,  12. 

In  the  quest  for  truth  every  man  is  free  to   search,  to 

believe,  and  to  decide  for  himself  alone.     And  his  assent  to 

any  form  of  belief  or  doctrine,  to  be  true,  must  spring  from 

his  own  personal  conviction  that  such   is  the  truth.      "The 

30 "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  1. 


354      ESTABLISHMENT  OF   THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

truth  itself,  forced  on  man  otherwise  than  by  its  own  inward 
power,  becomes  falsehood."  - Neander.31  And  he  who 
suffers  anything  to  be  so  forced  upon  him,  utters  a  lie 
against  himself  and  against  God. 

The  realm  of  thought  is  the  realm  of  God.  Whosoever 
would  attempt  to  restrict  or  coerce  the  free  exercise  of  the 
thought  of  another,  usurps  the  dominion  of  God,  and  exer- 
cises that  of  the  devil.  This  is  what  Constantine  did  at  the 
Council  of  Nice.  This  is  what  the  majority  of  the  Council 
of  Nice  itself  did.  In  carrying  out  the  purpose  for  which  it 
was  met,  this  is  the  only  thing  that  it  could  do,  no  matter 
which  side  of  the  controversy  should  prove  victorious.  What 
Constantine  and  the  Council  of  Nice  did,  was  to  open  the 
way  and  set  the  wicked  precedent  for  that  despotism  over 
thought,  which  continued  for  more  than  fourteen  hundred 
dreary  years,  and  which  was  carried  to  such  horrible  lengths 
when  the  pope  succeeded  to  the  place  of  Constantine  as  head 
over  both  Church  and  State. 

To  say  that  the  Holy  Spirit  had  anything  whatever  to  do 
with  the  council  either  in  discussing  or  deciding  the  question 
or  in  any  other  way,  is  but  to  argue  that  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
God  is  but  the  subject  and  tool  of  the  unholy  passions  of 
ambitious  and  wicked  men. 


31  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  1. 


CHAPTER  XV. 


ARIANISM    BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

AS  before  remarked,  those  who  against  their  will  had 
subscribed  to  the  creed  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  were 
determined  to  redeem  themselves  as  soon  as  possible,  and 
by  whatever  means  it  could  be  accomplished.  And  they  did 
accomplish  it.  The  story  is  curious,  and  the  lessons  which 
it  teaches  are  valuable. 

Shortly  after  the  dismissal  of  the  Council  -of  Nice,  but  in 
A.  D.  326,  Alexander  died,  and  Athanasius  succeeded  to  the 
episcopal  seat  of  Alexandria.  He,  much  more  than  Alex- 
ander, had  been  the  life  and  soul  of  the  controversy  with 
Arius.  It  was  he  who  had  continually  spurred  on  Alexander 
in  the  extreme  and  uncompromising  attitude  which  he  had 
maintained  toward  Arius.  And  now  when,  at  the  age  of 
thirty  years,  he  became  clothed  with  the  power  and  the  pre- 
rogatives of  the  archbishopric  of  Alexandria,  the  controversy 
received  a  new  impulse  from  both  sides  —  from  the  side  of 
the  Catholics,  by  the  additional  pride  and  intensity  of  dog- 
matism of  Athanasius ;  from  the  side  of  the  Arians  in  a 
determination  to  humble  the  proud  and  haughty  Athanasius. 
To  this  end  the  Arians  at  once  began  to  apply  themselves 
diligently  to  win  over  Constantino  to  their  side,  or  at  least 
to  turn  him  against  Athanasius. 

In  A.  D.  327  died  Constantine's  sister,  Constantia.  She 
had  held  with  the  Arian  party,  having  an  Arian  presbyter 
as  her  spiritual  adviser.  This  presbyter  had  convinced  her 
that  Arius  had  been  unjustly  condemned  by  the  council.  In 

29  1355] 


356  ARIANISM  BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

her  dying  moments  "she  entreated  the  emperor  to  recon- 
sider the  justice  of  the  sentence  against  that  innocent,  as  she 
declared,  and  misrepresented  man."  Constantino  soon  after- 
ward sent  a  message  to  Arms,  recalling  him  from  banish- 
ment, and  promising  to  send  him  back  to  Alexandria.  Arms 
came  and  presented  a  confession  of  faith  which  proved  satis- 
factory to  the  emperor.  About  the  same  time  Constantino 
also  restored  to  favor  the  other  two  leading  Arians,  Eusebius 
of  iS'icomedia  and  Theognis  of  Ptolemais.  "They  returned 
in  triumph  to  their  dioceses,  and  ejected  the  bishops  who  had 
been  appointed  to  their  place." — Mil-man.1  Hosius  having 
returned  to  his  place  in  Spain,  Constantino  fell  under  strong 
Arian  influences,  and  the  Arian  bishops  began  to  use  him 
for  the  accomplishment  of  their  purposes. 

In  A.  D.  328,  Constantino  made  a  journey  to  Jerusalem 
to  dedicate  the  church  that  he  had  built  there,  and  Eusebius 
of  Nicomedia  and  Theognis  both  accompanied  him.  Eusta- 
thius,  the  bishop  of  Antioch,  was  a  Catholic.  In  their  jour- 
ney, Eusebius  and  Theognis  passed  through  Antioch,  and 
.set  on  foot  a  scheme  to  displace  him  ;  and  when  they  re- 
turned, a  council  was  hastily  called,  and  upon  charges  of 
immorality  and  heresy,  "  Eustathius- was  deposed  and  ban- 
ished by  the  imperial  edict,  to  Thrace.  .  .  .  The  city  was 
divided  into  two  fierce  and  hostile  factions.  They  were  on 
the  verge  of  a  civil  war  ;  and  Antioch,  where  the  Christians 
had  first  formed  themselves  into  a  Christian  community,  but 
for  the  vigorous  interference  of  civil  power  and  the  timely 
appearance  of  an  imperial  commissioner,  might  have  wit- 
nessed the  first  blood  shed,  at  least  in  the  East,  in  a  Chris- 
tian quarrel. "-  -  Milman* 

Next  the  Arian  prelates  exerted  their  influence  to  have 
the  emperor  fulfill  his  promise  of  restoring  Arius  to  his 
place  in  Alexandria.  They  tried  first  by  friendly  represen- 
tations and  petitions,  and  at  last  by  threats,  to  induce  Atha- 
nasius  to  admit  Arius  again  to  membership  in  the  church, 

1  •'  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii.  chap,  iv,  par.  21.  a7c/.,  par.  23. 


ARIUS  RETURNED— ATHANASIUS  BANISHED.       357 

but  he  steadily  refused.  Then  they  secured  from  the  em- 
peror a  command  that  Athanasius  should  receive  Arius  and 
all  his  friends  who  wished  to  be  received,  to  the  fellowship 
of  the  church  of  Alexandria,  declaring  that  unless  he  did  so 
he  should  be  deposed  and  exiled.  Athanasius  refused  ;  and 
Constantino  neither  deposed  him  nor  exiled  him.  Then  the 
Arians  invented  against  him  many  charges.  Constantino 
summoned  him  to  Nicomedia  to  answer.  He  came,  and  was 
fully  acquitted,  and  the  emperor  sent  him  back  with  a  letter 
to  the  church  of  Alexandria,  in  which  he  pronounced  him  a 
"man  of  God." 

The  Arians  then  brought  new  accusations  against  him, 
this  time  even  to  the  extent  of  murder.  A  synod  of  bishops 
was  appointed  to  meet  at  Tyre  to  investigate  these  charges. 
As  the  synod  was  wholly  Arian,  Athanasius  declined  to 
appear ;  but  at  the  positive  command  of  the  emperor  he 
came,  and  succeeded  in  clearing  himself  of  all  the  charges 
that  could  be  tried  in  the  synod.  But  as  there  were  certain 
other  charges  which  required  to  be  investigated  in  Egypt,  a 
committee  was  appointed  for  the  purpose.  Yet  it  was  de- 
creed by  the  synod  that  no  one  who  belonged  to  the  party 
of  Athanasius  should  be  a  member  of  the  committee.  The 
committee  reported  against  Athanasius,  as  it  was  expected  to 
do  ;  and  by  the  synod  he  was  deposed  from  the  archbishop- 
ric of  Alexandria. 

Athanasius  appealed  to  the  emperor,  and  went  to  Con- 
stantinople to  present  his  plea.  As  Constantine  rode  along 
the  street,  he  was  met  by  a  band  of  ecclesiastics,  in  the  midst 
of  which  he  recognized  Athanasius.  "The  offended  em- 
peror, with  a  look  of  silent  contempt,  urged  his  horse  onward," 
when  Athanasius  loudly  exclaimed,  "God  shall  judge  be- 
tween thee  and  me  ;  since  thou  thus  espousest  the  cause  of 
my  calumniators,  I  demand  only  that  my  enemies  be  sum- 
moned and  my  cause  heard  in  the  imperial  presence."  — 
Milman*  Constantine  consented,  and  the  Arian  accusers 

sld.  par.  29. 


358  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

were  summoned  to  appear.  At  the  head  of  the  accusers 
were  both  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  and  Eusebius  of  Csesarea, 
who  were  now  in  high  favor  with  Constantine.  When  the 
investigation  was  opened,  however,  all  the  old  charges  were 
abandoned,  and  one  entirely  new  was  brought  which  was 
much  more  likely  to  have  weight  with  the  emperor  than  all 
the  others  put  together.  Constantinople,  as  well  as  Rome, 
was  dependent  upon  Egypt  for  the  wheat  which  supplied 
bread  to  its  inhabitants.  Athanasius  was  now  accused  of 
threatening  to  force  Constantine  to  support  him,  by  stopping 
the  supplies  of  grain  from  the  port  of  Alexandria.  Whether 
Constantine  really  believed  this  charge  or  not,  it  accom- 
plished its  purpose.  Athanasius  was  again  condemned,  and 
banished  to  Treves  in  Gaul,  February,  A.  D.  336. 

The  return  of  Arius  to  Alexandria  was  the  cause  of  con- 
tinued tumult,  and  he  was  called  to  Constantinople.  At  the 
request  of  the  emperor,  Arius  presented  a  new  confession  of 
faith,  which  proved  satisfactory,  and  Constantine  commanded 
the  bishop  of  Constantinople  to  receive  Arius  to  the  fellow- 
ship of  the  church  on  a  day  of  public  worship —  "it  hap- 
pened to  be  a  Sabbath  (Saturday)  —  on  which  day,  as  well 
as  Sunday,  public  worship  was  held  at  Constantinople." 
NeanderS  The  bishop  absolutely  refused  to  admit  him. 
The  Arians,  under  the  authority  of  the  emperor,  threatened 
that  the  next  day,  Sunday,  they  would  force  their  way  into 
the  church,  and  compel  the  admission  of  Arius  to  full  mem- 
bership in  good  and  regular  standing.  Upon  this  the  Ath- 
anasian  party  took  refuge  in  "prayer;"  the  bishop  prayed 
earnestly  that,  rather  than  the  church  should  be  so  disgraced, 
Arius  might  die  ;  and,  naturally  enough,  Arius  died  on  the 
evening  of  the  same  day.  "In  Constantinople,  where  men 
were  familiar  with  Asiatic  crimes,  there  was  more  than  a 
suspicion  of  poison.  But  when  Alexander's  party  proclaimed 
that  his  prayer  had  been  answered,  they  forgot  what  then 

*"  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Fourth, 
div.  ii,  o,  par.  30. 


ATIIANASIUS  IS  RETURNED  AND  AGAIN  BANISHED.     359 

that  prayer  must  have  been,  and  that  the  difference  is  little 
between  praying  for  the  death  of  a  man  and  compassing  it." 
-Draper.5  The  bishop  of  Constantinople  conducted  a 
solemn  service  of  thanksgiving.  "  Athanasius,  in  a  public 
epistle,  alludes  to  the  fate  of  Judas,  which  had  befallen  the 
traitor  to  the  co-equal  dignity  of  the  Son.  His  hollow 
charity  ill  disguises  his  secret  triumph,"  and  to  Athanasius, 
ever  afterward,  the  death  of  Arius  was  a  standing  argument 
and  a  sufficient  evidence  that  in  the  death  of  the  heretic,  God 
had  condemned  the  heresy.  — Milman* 

Petition  after  petition  was  presented  to  Constantine  for 
the  return  of  Athanasius  to  his  place  in  Alexandria,  but  the 
emperor  steadily  denounced  him  as  proud,  turbulent,  obsti- 
nate, and  intractable,  and  refused  all  petitions.  In  337,  in 
the  presence  of  death,  Constantine  was  baptized  by  an  Arian 
bishop  ;  and  thus  closed  the  life  of  him  upon  whom  a  grate- 
ful church  has  bestowed  the  title  of  "the  Great,"  though, 
"tested  by  character,  indeed,  he  stands  among  the  lowest  of 
all  those  to  whom  the  epithet  has  in  ancient  or  modern 
times  been  applied."  —  "  Encyclopedia  Britannica."  7 

Constantine  was  succeeded  by  his  three  sons  ;  Constan- 
tino, aged  twenty-one  years  ;  Constantius,  aged  twenty  ;  and 
Constans,  aged  seventeen.  They  apportioned  the  empire 
amongst  themselves.  Constantine  II  had  Constantinople 
and  some  portions  of  the  West,  with  pre-eminence  of  rank ; 
Constantius  obtained  Thrace,  Egypt,  and  all  the  East  ;  and 
Constans  held  the  greater  part  of  the  West.  Constantius 
was  a  zealous  Arian,  Constantine  and  Constans  were  no  less 
zealous  Catholics.  The  religious  parties  now  had  another 
element  added  to  their  strifes  —  they  could  use  the  religious 
differences  of  the  emperors  in  their  own  interests.  Athanasius 
being  an  exile  at  Treves,  was  in  the  dominions  of  Constans, 
his  "  fiery  defender  ;  "  while  the  place  of  his  bisphoric  was 

5  "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  chap  Ix,  par.  39. 

6  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  32,  and  note. 
'Article  "Constantine." 


360  ABIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

in  the  dominions  of  Constantius,  his  fiery  antagonist.  The 
Athanasian  party,  through  Constantine  II,  succeeded  in  per- 
suading Constantius  to  allow  the  return  of  Athanasius  and 
all  the  other  bishops  who  had  been  banished. 

The  return  of  these  bishops  again  set  all  the  East  ablaze. 
The  leaders  of  the  Arian  party  addressed  letters  to  the  em- 
perors, denouncing  Athanasius.  They  held  another  council 
at  Tyre,  A.  D.  3-iO,  in  which  they  brought  against  him  new 
charges,  and  condemned  him  upon  them  all.  Immediately 
afterward  a  rival  council  was  held  at  Alexandria,  which 
acquitted  Athanasius  of -all  things  in  which  the  other  council 
had  condemned  him.  In  this  same  year  Constantine  II  was 
killed  in  a  war  with  his  brother  Constans.  This  left  the  em- 
pire and  the  religion  to  the  two  brothers  —  Constantius  in 
Constantinople  and  the  East,  Constans  in  the  West.  In  the 
dominions  of  Constans  all  Arians  were  heretics ;  in  the  do- 
minions of  Constantius  all  Catholics  were  heretics.  The 
religious  war  continued,  and  increased  in  violence.  In  A.  D. 
341,  another  council,  consisting  of  ninety  bishops,  was  held 
at  Antioch,  in  the  presence  of  the  emperor  Constantius. 
This  council  adopted  a  new  creed,  from  which  the  Ilonnoou- 
sion  was  omitted  ;  they  ratified  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Tyre  of  the  preceding  year,  in  which  Athanasius  was  con- 
demned ;  and  they  appointed  in  his  place  a  bishop  of  their 
own  party,  named  Gregory. 

At  the  command  of  Constantius,  the  imperial  prefect 
issued  an  edict  announcing  the  degradation  of  Athanasius, 
and  the  appointment  of  Gregory.  "With  an  escort  of  five 
thousand  heavy-armed  soldiers,  Gregory  proceeded  to  Alex- 
andria to  take  possession  of  his  bishopric.  It  was  evening 
when  he  arrived  at  the  church  at  which  Athanasius  offi- 
ciated, and  the  people  were  engaged  in  the  evening  serv- 
ice. The  troops  were  posted  in  order  of  battle  about  the 
church  ;  but  Athanasius  slipped  out,  and  escaped  to  Rome, 
and  Gregory  was  duly  and  officially  installed  in  his  place. 
The  Athanasians,  enraged  at  such  proceedings,  set  the  church 


MACEDONIUS  MADE  BISHOP   OF   CONSTANTINOPLE.     3G1 

afire  ;  "scenes  of  savage  conflict  ensued,  the  churches  were 
taken  as  it  \vere  by  storm,"  and  "every  atrocity  perpetrated 
by  unbridled  multitudes,  embittered  by  every  shade  of  relig- 
ious faction. "  -  Milman.* 

Similar  scenes  were  soon  after  enacted  in  Constantinople, 
A.  D.  342.  In  338  died  Alexander,  the  bishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, who  had  prayed  Arms  to  death.  The  Arians  favored 
Macedonius,  the  Athanasians  favored  Paul,  for  the  vacant 
bishopric.  Paul  succeeded.  This  was  while  Constantius 
was  absent  from  the  city,  and  as  soon  as  he  returned,  he 
removed  Paul,  and  made  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  bishop  of 
Constantinople.  Eusebius  died  in  342.  The  candidacy  of 
Paul  and  Macedonius  was  at  once  revived.  The  partisans 
of  Paul  claimed  that  he,  having  been  unjustly  deposed,  was 
lawful  bishop  by  virtue  of  his  previous  ordination.  The 
supporters  of  Macedonius  claimed,  of  course,  that  Paul  had 
been  justly  deposed,  and  that  therefore  a  new  election  was 
in  order.  "The  dispute  spread  from  the  church  into  the 
streets,  from  the  clergy  to  the  populace  ;  blood  was  shed  ; 
the  whole  city  was  in  arms  on  one  part  or  the  other." — 
Milman. 9 

Constantius  was  in  Antioch.  As  soon  as  he  heard  of 
the  tumult  in  Constantinople,  he  ordered  Hermogenes, 
commander  of  the  cavalry  in  Thrace,  to  go  with  his  troops 
to  Constantinople  and  expel  Paul.  In  the  attempt  to  do 
so,  Hermogenes  was  met  by  such  a  desperate  attack,  that 
his  soldiers  were  scattered,  and  he  was  forced  to  take  refuge 
in  a  house.  The  house  was  immediately  set  on  fire.  Her- 
mogenes was  seized  and  dragged  by  the  feet  through  the 
streets  of  the  city  till  he  was  torn  to  pieces,  and  then  his 
mangled  body  was  cast  into  the  sea.  As  soon  as  this  news 
reached  Constantius,  he  went  to  Constantinople  and  expelled 
Paul,  without  confirming  the  election  of  Macedonius,  and 
returned  to  Antioch. 

8  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  v,  par.  9. 
9 Id.,  par.    11. 


362  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

Paul  went  to  Kome  and  laid  his  case  before  Julius.  The 
bishop  of  Rome,  glad  of  the  opportunity  to  exert  the  author- 
ity thus  recognized  in  him,  declared  Paul  re-instated,  and  sent 
him  back  with  a  letter  to  the  bishops  of  the  Eastern  churches, 
rebuking  those  who  had  deposed  him,  and  commanding  his 
restoration.  With  this  Paul  returned  to  Constantinople, 
and  resumed  his  place.  As  soon  as  Constantius  learned  of 
it,  he  commanded  Philip,  the  praetorian  prefect,  to  drivre 
out  Paul  again,  and  establish  Macedonius  in  his  place.  The 
prefect,  bearing  in  mind  the  fate  of  Hermogenes,  did  not 
attempt  to  execute  his  order  openly,  but  on  pretense  of  pub- 
lic business,  sent  a  respectful  message  to  Paul,  requesting 
his  assistance.  Paul  went  alone,  and  as  soon  as  he  arrived, 
the  prefect  showed  him  the  emperor's  order,  carried  him  out 
through  the  palace  a  back  way,  put  him  on  board  a  vessel 
that  was  waiting,  and  sent  him  away  to  Thessalonica. 

Paul  was  out  of  the  way,  but  Macedonius  was  not  yet  in 
his  place.  This  part  of  the  program  must  now  be  carried 
out.  The  prefect  in  his  chariot,  surrounded  by  a  strong 
body  of  guards  with  drawn  swords,  with  Macedonius  at  his 
side  in  full  pontifical  dress,  started  from  the  palace  to  the 
church  to  perform  the  ceremony  of  consecration.  By  this 
time  the  rumor  had  spread  throughout  the  city,  and  in  a 
wild  tumult  both  parties  rushed  to  the  church.  "The  sol- 
diers were  obliged  to  hew  their  way  through  the  dense  and 
resisting  crowd  to  the  altar,"  and  over  the  dead  bodies  of 
three  thousand  one  hundred  and  fifty  people,  "Macedonius 
passed  to  the  episcopal  throne  of  Constantinople." — Milman.™ 

About  the  time  that  Athanasius  reached  Rome,  wheri  he 
fled  from  the  invasion  of  Gregory,  three  messengers  from 
the  council  that  had  condemned  him,  also  arrived  there. 
The  bishop  of  Rome  summoned  the  accusers  of  Athanasius 
to  appear  before  a  council  which  he  would  hold  in  Rome ; 
but  they  disclaimed  his  jurisdiction,  and  denied  his  right  to 

10 Id.,  par.  18 ;  Socrates's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  ii,  chap,  xvi ;  Gibbon, 
"Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  36. 


GENERAL   COUNGIL   OF  SARDICA.  363 

rejudge  the  cause  of  a  bishop  who  had  already  been  con- 
demned by  a  council.  Julius  proceeded,  however,  with  the 
council,  which  was  composed  of  fifty  bishops.  They  unani- 
mously pronounced  Athanasius  innocent  of  all  the  charges 
laid  against  him,  and  declared  his  deposition  unlawful  ;  but 
this  instead  of  settling  the  difficulty,  rather  increased  it. 
Another  council  was  held  shortly  afterwards  at  Milan,  in 
the  presence  of  the  emperor  Constans,  which  confirmed  the 
decision  of  the  council  at  Home,  A.  D.  343. 

As  the  original  council  at  Antioch  had  been  held  in  the 
presence  of  Constantius,  and  as  this  qne  was  now  held  in 
the  presence  of  Constans,  both  divisions  of  the  empire  were 
now  involved.  The  next  step,  therefore,  was  to  call  for  a 
general  council ;  accordingly,  at  the  joint  command  of  the 
two  emperors,  a  general  council  was  ordered,  which  met  at 
Sardica,  A.  D.  345-6.  The  number  of  bishops  was  one  hun- 
dred and  seventy  ;  ninety-six  from  the  West,  and  seventy- 
four  from  the  East.  Among  the  bishops  came  Athanasius 
and  some  others  who  had  been  condemned  in  the  East.  The 
Eastern  bishops,  therefore,  demanded  that  they  should  be 
excluded  from  the  council :  the  Western  bishops  refused, 
upon  which  the  Eastern  bishops  all  withdrew,  and  met  in 
rival  council  at  Philippopolis.  "In  these  two  cities  sat  the 
rival  councils,  each  asserting  itself  the  genuine  representa- 
tive of  Christendom,  issuing  decrees,  and  anathematizing 
their  adversaries. " — Milman. u 

The  bishops  who  remained  at  Sardica  complained  that 
the  Arians  had  inflicted  upon  them  deeds  of  violence  by 
armed  soldiers,  and  by  the  populace  with  cudgels ;  had 
threatened  to  prosecute  them  before  the  magistrates ;  had 
forged  letters  against  them  ;  had  stripped  virgins  naked  ; 
had  burnt  churches  ;  and  had  imprisoned  the  servants  of 
God. 

Those  assembled  at  Philippopolis  retorted  against  Athan- 
asius and  his  followers,  that  with  violence,  slaughter,  and 

11  Id.,  par.   14. 


364  ARIANISM  BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

war,  they  had  wasted  the  churches  of  the  Alexandrians  and 
had  stirred  up  the  pagans  to  commit  upon  them  assaults 
and  slaughter.  They  declared  that  the  assembly  at  Sar- 
dica,  from  which  they  had  seceded,  was  composed  of  a  mul- 
titude of  all  kinds  of  wicked  and  corrupt  men  from  Con- 
stantinople and  Alexandria,  who  were  guilty  of  murder, 
bloodshed,  slaughter,  highway  robbery,  pillaging  and  de- 
spoiling ;  of  breaking  altars,  burning  churches,  plundering 
the  houses  of  private  citizens,  profaning  the  sacred  mys- 
teries, of  betraying  their  solemn  obligations  to  Christ,  and 
of  cruelly  putting  to  death  most  learned  elders,  deacons, 
and  priests  of  God.12  There  is  little  doubt  that  the  state- 
ments of  both  parties  were  correct. 

The  bishops  who  remained  at  Sardica,  had  everything 
their  own  way.  As  they  were  all  zealous  supporters  of 
Athanasius,  they  unanimously  revoked  the  decision  of  the 
Council  of  Antioch,  and  confirmed  the  acts  of  the  Council 
of  Rome.  Athanasius  and  three  other  bishops  who  had 
been  deposed  at  the  same  time  with  him,  were  pronounced 
innocent ;  and  those  who  had  been  put  in  their  places,  were 
declared  deposed  and  accursed,  and  entirely  cut  off  from  the 
communion  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

They  also  enacted  a  series  of  canons,  of  which  three, 
"full  of  pure  love,"  bestowed  special  dignity  upon  the 
bishop  of  Rome,  as  the  source  of  appeal.  One  of  these 
ordered  that  "if  any  bishop  shall  think  himself  unjustly 
condemned,  his  judges,  in  honor  of  the  memory  of  the  holy 
apostle  Peter  —  Sancti,  Petri  apostoli  memwiam  honoremus, 
—  shall  acquaint  the  bishop  of  Rome  therewith,  who  may 
either  confirm  the  first  judgment,  or  order  the  cause  to  be 
re-examined  by  such  of  the  neighboring  bishops  as  he  shall 
think  fit  to  name."  Another  ordered  "that  the  see  of  the 
deposed  bishop  shall  remain  vacant  till  his  cause  shall  be 
judged  by  the  bishop  of  Rome."  A  third  ordered  "  that  if 

12  See  the  original,  in  Milman's  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii.,  chap,  v, 
note  to  par.  34. 


ATHANASIU8  AGAIN  RETURNED.  365 

a  bishop  condemned  in  his  own  province,  shall  choose  to  be 
judged  by  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  desires  him  to  appoint 
some  of  his  presbyters  to  judge  him  in  his  name,  together 
with  the  bishops,  the  bishop  of  Rome  may  grant  him  his 
request."-  —  Bower.1*  The  effect  of  this  was  only  to  multiply 
and  intensify  differences  and  disputes  amongst  bishops,  and 
infinitely  to  magnify  the  power  of  the  bishop  of  Rome. 

Athanasius,  though  fully  supported  by  the  council,  pre- 
ferred to  remain'  under  the  protection  of  Constans,  rather 
than  to  risk  the  displeasure  of  Constantius  by  returning  to 
Alexandria.  He  remained  two  years  in  the  West,  during 
which  time  he  was  often  the  guest  of  the  emperor  Constans, 
and  made  such  use  of  these  opportunities  that  in  A.  D.  349 
Constans  "  signified,  by  a  concise  and  peremptory  epistle  to 
his  brother  Constantius,  that  unless  he  consented  to  the  im- 
mediate restoration  of  Athanasius,  he  himself,  with  a  fleet 
and  army,  would  seat  the  archbishop  on  the  throne  of  Alex- 
andria."—  Gibbon.™  Constantius  was  just  at  this  time  threat- 
ened with  war  with  Persia,  and  fearing  the  result  if  war 
should  be  made  upon  him  at  the  same  time  by  his  brother, 
he  yielded,  and  became  as  effusive  in  his  professed  friend- 
ship for  Athanasius  as  he  had  formerly  been  in  his  genuine 
hatred. 

Constantius  invited  Athanasius  to  Antioch,  where  the 
two  secret  enemies  met  with  open  professions  of  friendship, 
and  even  with  manifestations  of  "mutual  respect  and  cor- 
diality." Constantius  ordered  all  the  accusations  against 
Athanasius  to  be  erased  from  the  registers  of  the  city,  and 
with  a  letter  of  commendation,  couched  in  terms  of  courtly 
flattery,  he  sent  the  archbishop  on  his  way  to  Alexandria. 
"The  Arian  bishop,  Gregory,  was  dead;  and  Athanasius, 
amid  the  universal  joy,  re-entered  the  city.  The  bishops 
crowded  from  all  parts  to  salute  and  congratulate  the  prelate 

13  "History of  the  Popes,"  Julius,  par.  5;  and  Hefele,  "History  of  the  Coun- 
cils," Sardica,  canons  3,  4,  5. 

14  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  26. 


366  AHIANISM  BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

who  had  thus  triumphed  over  the  malice  of  even  imperial 
enemies.  Incense  curled  up  in  all  the  streets  ;  the  city  was 
brilliantly  illuminated. " — Milman.1'0 

In  February,  A.  D.  350,  Constans  was  murdered  by  the 
usurper  Magnentius,  and  in  353  Constantius  became  sole 
emperor  by  the  final  defeat  and  death  of  the  usurper.  Con- 
stantius no  sooner  felt  himself  assured  of  the  sole  imperial 
authority,  than  he  determined  to  execute  vengeance  upon 
Athanasius,  and  make  the  Arian  doctrine  the  religion  of  the 
whole  empire.  Yet  he  proposed  to  accomplish  this  only  in 
orthodox  fashion,  through  a  general  council.  As  it  was 
thus  that  his  father  had  established  the  Athanasian  doctrine, 
which  was  held  by  all  the  Catholics  to  be  strictly  orthodox, 
to  establish  the  Arian  doctrine  by  a  like  process,  assuredly 
could  be  no  less  orthodox. 

The  way  was  already  open  for  the  calling  of  a  general 
council,  by  the  disputes  which  had  arisen  over  the  standing 
of  the  Council  of  Sardica.  That  council,  when  it  was  called, 
was  intended  to  be  general ;  but  when  the  Eastern  bishops 
seceded,  they,  with  all  the  other  Arians  in  the  empire,  denied 
that  those  who  remained  could  by  any  fair  construction  be 
termed  a  general  council.  More  than  this,  when  the  East- 
ern bishops  seceded,  there  were  but  ninety-four  remaining  at 
Sardica  ;  whereas  the  Council  of  Antioch,  whose  acts  the 
bishops  at  Sardica  had  condemned,  was  composed  of  ninety 
bishops,  who  acted  with  the  direct  approval  of  Constantius 
himself.  Upon  this  it  was  argued  that  the  Council  of  Sardica 
was  no  more  entitled  to  the  dignity  of  a  general  council, 
than  was  that  of  Antioch.  Further,  Liberius,  who  became 
bishop  of  Rome,  May  22,  A.  D.  352,  had  already  petitioned 
Constantius  for  a  general  council. 

Constantius  summoned  the  council  to  meet  at  Aries,  A.  D. 
353.  Liberius  was  not  present  in  person,  but  he  sent  as  his 
representatives  two  bishops  in  whom  he  reposed  entire  con- 
fidence. We  know  not  how  many  bishops  were  in  this 
council,  but  when  they  assembled,  it  was  found  that  the 

15  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap.  v.  par.  15. 


GENERAL   COUNCILS  OF  ABLE 8  AND  MILAN.        367 

Arian  bishops  were  in  the  majority  ;  and  they  insisted  first 
of  all  upon  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius.  The  Catholic 
bishops  argued  that  the  question  of  faith. ought  to  be  dis- 
cussed, before  they  should  be  required  to  condemn  him  ;  but 
the  Arians  insisted  upon  their  point. 

Constantius  came  to  the  support  of  the  Arians  with  an 
edict  sentencing  to  banishment  all  who  would  not  sign  the 
condemnation  of  Athanasius.  The  representatives  of  Libe- 
rius  proposed  a  compromise,  to  the  effect  that  they  would  sign 
the  condemnation  of  Athanasius,  if  the  Arians  would  like- 
wise condemn  as  heresy  the  doctrine  of  Arius.  The  Arians 
had  them  reduce  this  proposition  to  writing,  that  they  might 
have  it  as  a  testimony  afterward  ;  and  then,  knowing  the 
advantage  which  they  held  by  this  concession,  and  under  the 
edict  of  Constantius,  they  insisted  more  strenuously  than  ever 
upon  the  unconditional  condemnation  of  Athanasius.  Find- 
ing that  there  was  no  escape,  the  representatives  of  Liberius 
and  all  the  other  Athanasian  bishops  but  one,  signed  the 
document.  The  one  bishop  who  refused  was  Paulinus  of 
Treves.  He  was  accordingly  banished,  and  died  in  exile 
five  years  afterward. 

Liberius  refused  to  confirm  the  action  of  his  representa- 
tives, and  utterly  rejected  the  action  of  the  council.  In  fact, 
he  was  so  scandalized  by  the  disgraceful  surrender  of  his 
legates,  that  in  a  letter  to  Hosius,  he  expressed  himself  as 
willing  to  wash  out  "with  his  blood  the  stain  which  the 
scandalous  conduct  of  his  legates  had  brought  upon  his 
character."  —Sower.16  To  relieve  him  from  his  distress, 
Lucifer,  bishop  of  Cagliari  in  Sardinia,  advised  him  to  ask 
the  emperor  for  another  council,  offering  to  go  himself  to 
Aries  and  present  the  request  to  Constantius.  Liberius 
accepted  the  proposition,  and  Lucifer,  accompanied  by  a 
presbyter  and  a  deacon  of  the  church  of  Rome,  went  to  Con- 
stantius, and  presented  the  letter  of  Liberius.  Constantius 
granted  his  request,  and  appointed  a  council  to  meet  at 
Milan,  in  the  beginning  of  the  year  355. 

*6  "  History  of  tljc  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  4. 


368  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

The  council  met,  accordingly,  to  the  number  of  more 
than  three  hundred  bishops  of  the  West,  but  only  a  few  from 
the  East.  This  council  was  but  a  repetition  on  a  larger 
scale,  of  that  at  Aries.  Constantius  insisted,  without  any 
qualification,  that  the  bishops  should  sign  the  condemnation 
of  Athanasius.  He  took  a  personal  interest  in  all  the  pro- 
ceedings. Like  his  father  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  he  had 
the  meetings  of  the  council  held  in  the  imperial  palace,  and 
presided  over  them  himself. 

Constantius  not  only  demanded  that  the  Catholic  bishops 
should  sign  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius,  but  that  they 
should  also  sign  an  Arian  formula  of  faith.  They  pleaded 
that  the  accusers  of  Athanasius  were  unreliable.  Constan- 
tius replied,  "  I  myself  am  now  the  accuser  of  Athanasius, 
and  on  my  word,  Yalens  and  the  others  [the  accusers]  must 
be  believed."  They  argued  that  this  was  against  the  canon 
of  the  church.  Constantius  replied,  "  My  will  is  the  canon," 
and  appealed  to  the  Eastern  bishops,  who  all  assented  that 
this  was  correct.  He  then  declared  that  whoever  did  not 
sign  might  expect  banishment.  At  this  the  orthodox  bishops 
lifted  up  their  hands  beseechingly  towards  heaven,  and 
prayed  the  emperor  ' ;  to  fear  God,  who  had  given  him  the 
dominion,  that  it  might  not  be  taken  from  him  ;  also  to  fear 
the  day  of  judgment,  and  not  to  confound  the  secular  power 
with  the  law  of  the  church,  nor  to  introduce  into  the  church 
the  Arian  heresy."  - Ifefele." 

They  forgot  that  they  themselves,  many  of  them  at  least, 
had  unanimously  approved  in  Constantino  at  the  Council  of 
Nice  the  identical  course  which  now  they  condemned  in  Con- 
stantius at  the  Council  of  Milan.  In  their  approval  of  the 
action  of  Constantine  in  forcing  upon  others  what  they 
themselves  believed,  they  robbed  themselves  of  the  right  to 
protest  when  Constantius  or  anybody  else  should  choose  to 
force  upon  them  what  somebody  else  believed.  They  ought 
not  to  have  thought  it  strange  that  they  should  reap  what 
they  had  sown. 

17  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  74,  par.  6, 


THE  BISHOP  OF  HOME  18  BANISHED.  369 

Ccmstantius,  yet  further  to  imitate  his  father,  claimed  to 
have  had  a  vision,  and  that  thus  by  direct  inspiration  from 
heaven,  he  was  commissioned  "to  restore  peace  to  the  af- 
flicted church."  At  last,  by  the  "inspiration"  of  "flatter- 
ies, persuasions,  bribes,  menaces,  penalties,  exiles "  (j\fll- 
man1*),  the  Council  of  Milan  was  brought  to  a  greater 
unanimity  of  faith  than  even  the  Council  of  Nice  had  been. 
For  there,  out  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  bishops, 
five  were  banished  ;  while  here,  out  of  a  greater  number,  only 
five  were  banished.  Surely  if  a  general  council  is  of  any 
authority,  the  Council  of  Milan  must  take  precedence  of 
the  Council  of  Nice,  and  Arianism  be  more  orthodox  than 
Athanasianism. 

The  banished  ones  were  Dionysius  of  Milan,  Eusebius 
of  Vercelli,  Lucifer,  and  two  other  representatives  of  Libe- 
rius,  Pancratius  and  Hilary.  Hilary  was  cruelly  beaten 
with  rods  before  he  was  sent  away. 

The  documents  which  had  been  signed,  "all  the  other 
Western  bishops,  like  their  colleagues  at  Milan,  were  to  be 
forced  to  sign,  and  the  whole  West  compelled  to  hold  com- 
munion with  the  Arians." — Ilefele.™  Liberius  rejected  the 
decisions  of  the  council,  and  still  defended  Athanasius. 
Constantius  sent  one  of  his  chief  ministers  with  presents  to 
bribe,  and  a  letter  to  threaten,  him.  Liberius  rejected  the 
bribes  and  disregarded  the  threats,  and  in  return  cursed  all 
Arian  heretics  and  excommunicated  Constantius.  The  of- 
ficer returned  to  Milan,  and  reported  his  failure;  upon  this 
the  emperor  sent  peremptory  orders  to  the  prefect  of  Rome 
to  arrest  Liberius,  and  bring  him  to  Milan.  The  prefect, 
dreading  the  violence  of  the  populace,  took  the  precaution 
to  arrest  Liberius  by  night.  « 

Arrived  at  Milan,  the  captive  bishop  was  brought  before 
Constantius,  and  there  also  he  maintained  his  refusal  to  in- 
dorse the  action  of  the  council.  Constantius  told  him  that 
he  must  either  sign  or  go  into  exile,  and  he  would  give  him 

18  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  v,  par.  22. 

19  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  Ixxv,  par.  1. 


370  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

three  days  to  decide.  Liberius  answered  that  he  had  al- 
ready decided,  and  that  he  should  not  change  his  mind  in 
three  days  nor  in  three  months  ;  therefore,  the  emperor  might 
as  well  send  him  that  minute  to  whatever  place  he  wanted 
him  to  go.  Nevertheless,  Constantius  gave  him  the  three 
days,  but  before  they  were  past,  sent  for  him  again,  hoping 
to  persuade  him  to  yield.  Liberius  stood  fast,  and  the  em- 
peror pronounced  sentence  of  banishment,  and  sent  him  to 
Berea  in  Thrace.  Before  Liberius  was  gone  out  of  the 
palace,  the  emperor  sent  him  a  present  of  five  hundred 
pieces  of  gold,  as  he  said,  to  pay  his  expenses.  Liberius 
sent  it  back,  saying  he  had  better  keep  it  to  pay  his  soldiers. 
The  empress  also  sent  him  a  like  sum  ;  this  he  returned  with 
the  same  answer,  with  the  additional  message  to  the  em- 
peror that,  if  he  did  not  know  what  to  do  with  so  much 
money,  he  might  give  it  to  Epictetus  or  Auxentius,  his  two 
favorite  Arian  bishops. 

As  soon  as  it  was  known  in  Rome  that  Liberius  was  ban- 
ished, the  people  assembled,  and  bound  themselves  by  an 
oath  not  to  acknowledge  any  other  bishop  as  long  as  Libe- 
rius lived.  The  Arian  party,  however,  were  determined  to 
have  a  bishop  in  Rome.  They  selected  a  deacon  of  that 
church,  Felix  by  name,  who  was  willing  to  be  bishop  of 
Rome.  The  clergy  would  not  receive  him,  and  the  people 
collected  in  mutinous  crowds,  and  refused  to  allow  the 
Arians  to  enter  any  of  the  churches.  The  imperial  palace 
in  Rome  was  chosen  as  the  place  of  ordination.  Three  of 
the  emperor's  eunuchs  were  appointed  to  represent  the  peo- 
ple, and  they  duly  elected  Felix.  Three  bishops  of  the 
court  were  appointed  to  represent  the  clergy,  and  they 
ordained  the  new  bishtp.  "The  intrusion  of  Felix  created 
a  great  sedition,  in  which  many  lost  their  lives."  —  Bower.™ 

Another  bishop,  whose  indorsement  of  the  creed  of 
Milan  was  scarcely  less  important  than  that  of  Liberius  him- 
self, was  Hosius  of  Cordova,  who  had  been  one  of  the  chief 
factors  in  forming  the  union  of  Church  and  State.  He  was 
^°"  History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  6. 


IIOSIUS  FORCED    TO  BECOME  ARIAN.  371 

one  of  the  bishops  who  visited  Constantino  in  Gaul  in  A.  D. 
311,  and  was  one  of  Constantino's  chief  advisers  afterward 
in  all  his  course,  until  after  the  Council  of  Nice.  It  was 
upon  his  advice  and  motion,  more  than  any  other,  that  the 
Council  of  Nice  was  called  ;  it  was  his  influence  more  than 
any  other,  that  caused  Con stantirie  to  command  that  "  Ho- 
moousion"  should  be  inserted  in  the  Nicene  Creed.  His 
name  was  the  first  that  was  set  to  the  creed  of  Nice  ;  his 
name  likewise  was  the  first  that  was  set  to  the  decrees  of 
the  Council  of  Sardica,  over  which  he  presided  ;  and  it  was 
he  who  secured  the  adoption  in  that  council,  of  the  canons 
which  made  the  bishop  of  Rome  the  source  of  appeal.  He 
was  now  about  one  hundred  years  old. 

Constantius  determined  to  have  the  signature  of  Hosius 
to  the  decisions  of  the  Council  of  Milan.  The  emperor 
summoned  him  to  Milan,  and  when  he  came,  entertained 
him  for  several  days  before  suggesting  his  purpose.  As 
soon  as  he  did  suggest  it,  however,  Hosius  declared  that  he 
was  ready  to  suffer  now  under  Constantius,  as  he  had  suf- 
fered sixty  years  before  under  his  grandfather  Maximian  ; 
and  in  the  end  made  such  an  impression  upon  Constantius, 
that  he  allowed  him  to  return  unmolested  to  Cordova.  But 
it  was  not  long  before  the  favorites  of  Constantius  prevailed 
upon  him  to  make  another  attempt  to  bring  Hosius  to  terms. 
He  first  sent  him  flattering  and  persuasive  letters,  and  when 
these  failed,  he  proceeded  to  threats  ;  but  all  were  unavail- 
ing, and  Hosius  was  banished  to  Sirmium.  His  relations 
were  stripped  of  all  their  estates  and  reduced  to  beggary, 
but  all  without  avail.  Next  he  was  closely  imprisoned  — 
still  he  refused.  Then  he  was  cruelly  beaten,  and  finally 
put  to  the  rack  and  most  inhumanly  tortured.  Under  these 
fearful  torments,  the  aged  bishop  yielded  at  last,  A.  D.  356. 

"The  case  of  Hosius  deserves,  without  all  doubt,  to  be 
greatly  pitied  ;  but  it  would  be  still  more  worthy  of  our  pity 
and  compassion,  had  he  been  himself  an  enemy  to  all  per- 
secution.    But  it  must  be  observed  that  he  was  the  author 
3O 


372  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

•  and  promoter  of  the  first  Christian  persecution  ;  for  it  was 
he  who  first  stirred  up  Constantine  against  the  Donatists, 
many  of  whom  were  sent  into  exile,  and  some  even  sen- 
tenced to  death  :  nay,  and  led  to  the  place  of  execution."  — 
Bower. Zl  The  surrender  of  Hosius  was  counted  as  the  most 
signal  of  victories  ;  it  was  published  throughout  the  whole 
East,  and  caused  the  greatest  rejoicing  among  the  Arians 
everywhere. 

The  next  step  was  for  Constantius  to  remove  Athanasius 
from  the  archbishopric  of  Alexandria.  It  was  now  twenty- 
six  months  from  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Milan,  during 
which  time  Constantius  had  been  paving  the  way  for  his  final 
expulsion.  As  soon  as  the  council  had  closed,  an  order  was 
sent  to  the  prefect  of  Alexandria,  to  deprive  Athanasius  of  the 
imperial  revenue,  and  give  it  to  the  Arians.  At  the  same 
time,  all  who  held  public  office  were  commanded  wholly  to 
abandon  the  cause  of  Athanasius,  and  to  communicate  with 
the  Arians  only.  Messengers  were  sent  into  the  provinces, 
bearing  the  emperor's  authority  to  compel  the  bishops  to 
communicate  with  the  Arians,  or  to  go  into  exile.  Now 
he  sent  two  of  his  secretaries  and  some  other  officials  of  the 
palace,  to  Alexandria,  to  banish  Athanasius.  These  officers, 
with  the  governor  of  Egypt  and  the  prefect,  commanded 
Athanasius  to  leave  the  city.  He  demanded  that  they  pro- 
duce the  written  authority  of  the  emperor  ;  but  Constantius 
had  sent  no  written  order.  Athanasius,  supported  by  the 
people,  refused  to  obey  any  verbal  order. 

A  truce  was  agreed  upon,  until  an  embassy  could  be  sent 
to  Constantius  to  bring  a  written  command  ;  but  on  the  part 
of  the  officers,  this  truce  was  granted  merely  for  the  purpose 
of  disarming  the  vigilance  of  the  supporters  of  Athanasius. 
The  officers  immediately  began  with  the  greatest  possible 
secrecy  to  gather  the  necessary  troops  into  the  city.  Twenty- 
three  days  were  thus  spent,  and  a  force  of  five  thousand 
troops  held  possession  of  the  most  important  parts  of  the 
city.  The  night  before  a  solemn  festival  day  of  the  church, 

21  Id.,  par.  19. 


ATHANA8IU8  AGAIN  REMOVED.  373 

Athanasius  was  conducting  the  services  in  the  church  of  St. 
Theonas.  Suddenly,  at  midnight,  there  was  all  about  the 
church  the  sound  of  trumpets,  the  rushing  of  horses,  and 
the  clash  of  arms  ;  the  doors  were  burst  open,  and  with  the 
discharge  of  a  cloud  of  arrows,  the  soldiers,  with  drawn 
swords,  poured  in  to  arrest  Athanasius.  "The  cries  of  the 
wounded,  the  groans  of  those  who  were  trampled  down  in 
attempting  to  force  their  way  out  through  the  soldiery,  the 
shouts  of  the  assailants,  mingled  in  wild  and  melancholy 
uproar."  —  Milman.^  In  the  tumult,  Athanasius  again  es- 
caped. "Counts,  prefects,  tribunes,  whole  armies,  were 
successively  employed  to  pursue  a  bishop  and  a  fugitive  ; 
the  vigilance  of  the  civil  and  military  powers  was  excited  by 
the  imperial  edicts  ;  liberal  rewards  were  promised  to  the 
man  who  should  produce  Athanasius  either  alive  or  dead, 
and  the  most  severe  penalties  were  denounced  against  those 
who  should  dare  to  protect  the  public  enemy." — Gibbon.*3 
Yet  Athanasius  succeeded  in  so  perfectly  concealing  himself 
for  more  than  six  years,  that  Constantius  died  without  ever 
finding  him. 

Athanasius  was  gone.  The  next  thing  was  to  install 
an  Arian  bishop  in  his  place.  Their  choice  fell  this  time 
on  George  of  Cappadocia,  who  was  more  savage  and  cruel 
than  Gregory,  the  Arian  bishop  who  had  been  appointed  to 
this  place  before.  George's  original  occupation  was  that  of 
"a  parasite,"  by  which  means  he  secured  the  contract  for 
supplying  the  army  with  bacon.  "His  employment  was 
mean  ;  he  rendered  it  infamous.  lie  accumulated  wealth 
by  the  basest  arts  of  fraud  and  corruption,"  which  finally 
became  so  notorious  that  he  had  to  flee  from  justice.  The 
Arian  bishop  of  Antioch  made  him  a  priest  and  a  church- 
member  at  the  same  time.  Surrounded  by  armed  troops,  he 
was  placed  on  the  episcopal  throne,  "and  during  at  least 
four  months,  Alexandria  was  exposed  to  the  insults  of  a 
licentious  army,  stimulated  by  the  ecclesiastics  of  a  hostile 

28  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  v,  par.  28. 
«"  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  33. 


374  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

faction."  Every  kind  of  violence  was  committed.  "And 
the  same  scenes  of  violence  and  scandal  which  had  been 
exhibited  in  the  capital,  were  repeated  in  more  than  ninety 
episcopal  cities  of  Egypt.  The  entrance  of  the  new  arch- 
bishop was  that  of  a  barbarian  conqueror  ;  and  each  moment 
of  his  reign  was  polluted  by  cruelty  and  avarice." — Gibbon** 

In  A.  D.  357  Constantius  visited  Rome  and  celebrated  a 
triumph.  The  leading  women  of  the  church  determined  to 
take  advantage  of  the  opportunity  thus  offered  to  present  a 
petition  for  the  recall  of  Liberius.  They  first  tried  to  press 
their  husbands  into  the  service  of  approaching  the  emperor, 
by  threatening  to  leave  and  go  in  a  body  to  Liberius,  and 
share  his  exile.  The  husbands  replied  that  the  emperor 
would  be  much  less  likely  to  be  offended  by  the  visit  of  a 
delegation  of  women  than  of  men,  and  that  thus  there  would 
be  more  hope  of  really  securing  the  recall  of  the  banished 
bishop. 

The  women  agreed  that  the  suggestion  was  a  wise  one, 
and  "having adorned  themselves  in  the  most  splendid  attire, 
that  their  rank  might  be  evident  from  their  appearance" 
(Theodoret™},  they  proceeded  to  the  imperial  palace.  Con- 
stantius received  them  courteously.  They  earnestly  pleaded 
with  him  to  take  pity  on  that  great  city  and  its  numerous 
flock  "bereft  of  its  shepherd,  and  ravaged  by  wolves."  The 
emperor  replied,  "I  thought  you  had  a  pastor.  Is  not  Felix 
as  capable  of  exercising  the  pastoral  office  as  any  other  ? " 
The  women  answered  that  Felix  was  detested  and  avoided 
by  all,  and  that  none  would  attend  service  so  long  as  Libe- 
rius was  absent.  Constantius  smiled  and  said,  "If  so,  you 
must  have  Liberius  again  :  I  shall  without  delay  dispatch 
the  proper  orders  for  his  return." 


z*Id.,  chap,  xxi,  par.  31,  and  chap,  xxiii,  par.  27.  November  30,  A.  r>.  361, 
he  was  murdered  by  the  pagans.  In  the  fifth  century  —  A.  D.  494  —  Pope  Gela- 
sius  made  him  a  martyr.  In  the  sixth  century  he  was  worshiped  as  a  Catholic 
saint;  and  since  the  Crusades,  he  has  been  "the  renowned  Saint  George  of  En- 
gland, patron  of  arms,  of  chivalry,  and  of  the  Garter." 

25 "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  ii,  chap.  xvii. 


LIBERIUS  BECOMES  ARIAN  AND  18  RECALLED. 

The  next  day  the  edict  of  recall  was  read  in  the  circus, 
but  it  provided  that  the  two  bishops  should  rule  jointly.  It 
happened  to  be  the  most  interesting  and  decisive  moment  of 
a  horse-race,  but  the  excited  feelings  of  the  multitude  were 
turned  in  an  instant  to  the  more  absorbing  question  of  the 
orthodox  faith.  Some  cried  in  ridicule  that  the  edict  was 
just,  because  there  were  two  factions  in  the  circus,  and  now 
each  one  could  have  its  own  bishop.  Others  shouted,  "What, 
because  we  have  two  factions  in  the  circus,  are  we  to  have 
two  factions  in  the  church?"  Then  the  whole  multitude  set 
up  one  universal  yell,  "There  is  but  one  God,  one  Christ, 
one  bishop  ! "  Upon  which  Theodoret  devoutly  remarks, 
"Sometime  after  this  Christian  people  had  uttered  these 
pious  and  just  acclamations,  the  holy  Liberius  returned,  and 
Felix  retired  to  another  city."26 

It  is  true  that  Liberius  returned  soon  after  this,  but  Con- 
stantius  had  made  it  the  condition  of  his  return  that  he 
should  sign  the  decisions  of  the  Council  of  Milan.  Two 
years'  sojourn  in  cold  and  barbarous  Thrace,  while  a  rival 
bishop  was  enjoying  the  splendors  of  the  episcopal  office  in 
Rome,  exerted  a  strong  tendency  to  convince  Liberius  that 
Athanasius  was  rightly  condemned,  and  that  the  Arian  doc- 
trine might  be  true.  He  therefore  signed  both  the  condem- 
nation of  Athanasius  and  the  Arian  creed  of  Milan.  Upon 
this  Constantius  called  him  to  Sirmium.  But  as  in  the  mean- 
time the  emperor  had  changed  his  views  and  adopted  the 
Semi-Arian  doctrine,  he  would  not  allow  Liberius  to  return 
to  Rome  unless  he  would  first  subscribe  to  the  same.  Libe- 
rius signed  this  also,  and  was  allowed  to  go  on  his  way  to 
Rome.  The  people  poured  out  through  the  gates  to  meet 
him,  and  escorted  him  in  triumph  to  the  episcopal  palace, 
August  2,  358.  "The  adherents  of  Felix  were  inhumanly 
murdered  in  the  streets,  in  the  public  places,  in  the  baths, 
and  even  in  the  churches  ;  and  the  face  of  Rome,  upon  the 
return  of  a  Christian  bishop,  renewed  the  horrid  image  of 
the  massacres  of  Marius  and  the  proscriptions  of  Sylla." — 

.,  and  Bower,  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  7. 


376  AHIANISM  BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

(ribbon.*"1  Felix  escaped,  but  returned  not  long  afterward, 
and  attempted  to  hold  services  in  a  church  beyond  the  Tiber, 
but  was  again  driven  out. 

As  stated  above,  Constantius  had  again  changed  his 
opinions  as  to  the  nature  of  Christ,  adopting  the  Semi-Arian 
view.  The  Semi-Arian  party  was  a  third  one  that  had 
grown  up  between  the  strictly  Arian  and  the  Athanasian, 
based  upon  a  third  mental  abstraction  as  elusive  as  either  of 
the  others.  The  three  doctrines  now  stood  thus  :  — 

The  Athanasians  declared  the  Son  of  God  to  be  of  the 
same  substance,  the  same  existence,  and  the  same  essence, 
with  the  Father. 

The  strict  Arians  declared  the  Son  to  be  like  the  Father, 
but  rather  by  grace  than  by  nature, —  as  like  as  a  creature 
could  be  to  the  Creator. 

The  Semi-Arians  declared  the  Son  to  be  like  the  Father  in 
nature,  in  existence,  in  essence,  in  substance,  and  in  every- 
thing else. 

The  Athanasian  doctrine  was  expressed  in  Ilomoousion  / 
the  strict  Arian  in  Anomean  /  and  the  Semi-Arian  in 
I'lomoiousion.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  Semi-Arian  was 
nearer  to  the  original  doctrine  of  Arius  than  was  the  Arian 
of  the  present  period.  This  was  owing  to  the  followers 
of  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  who  in  the  bitterness  of  their 
opposition  to  the  Athanasians,  were  carried  away  from  the 
original  Arian  doctrine  —  from  the  Ilomoiousion  to  the 
Anomean. 

The  flomoousion  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Council  of 
Nice  ;  the  Anomean  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Council  of 
Milan ;  the  Ilomoiousion  was  the  doctrine  now  held  by 
Constantius,  and  a  company  that  actually  outnumbered 
the  Arians. 

In  furtherance  of  his  "visionary"  commission  to  give 
peace  to  the  church,  Constantius  determined  to  call  a  gen- 
eral council,  and  have  the  Semi-Arian  doctrine  adopted. 
The  council  was  first  appointed  to  meet  at  Nicomedia,  A.  D. 

""Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxi,  par.  85. 


DOUBLE   COUNCIL  — RIMINI  AND  SELEUCIA. 

358,  but  while  the  bishops  were  on  the  way  there,  an  earth- 
quake destroyed  that  city.  The  appointment  was  then 
changed  to  Nice  in  early  summer,  359.  But  before  that 
time  arrived,  he  decided  to  have  two  councils  instead  of 
one,  that  all  might  more  easily  attend.  The  bishops  of  the 
East  were  to  meet  at  Seleucia  in  Isauria  ;  those  of  the  West 
at  Rimini  on  the  Adriatic  Sea  in  Italy. 

The  emperor  issued  an  order  commanding  all  bishops 
without  exception  to  attend  one  or  the  other,  as  they  might 
choose,  and  the  civil  officers  in  the  provinces  were  commis- 
sioned to  see  that  the  command  was  obeyed.  "The  bish- 
ops therefore  set  out  from  all  parts  ;  the  public  carriages, 
roads,  and  houses  were  everywhere  crowded  with  them, 
which  gave  great  offense  to  the  catechumens,  and  no  small 
diversion  to  the  pagans,  who  thought  it  equally  strange 
and  ridiculous  that  men  who  had  been  brought  up  from 
their  infancy  in  the  Christian  religion,  and  whose  business 
it  was  to  instruct  others  in  that  belief,  should  be  constantly 
hurrying,  in  their  old  age,  from  one  place  to  another,  to 
know  what  they  themselves  should  believe."  —Boicer™  To 
make  sure  that  the  two  councils  should  act  as  one,  it  was 
ordered  that  each  should  appoint  two  deputies  to  report  to 
the  emperor  the  decisions  arrived  at,  "  that  he  might  him- 
self know  whether  they  had  come  to  an  understanding  in 
accordance  with  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  might  decide  ac- 
cording to  his  own  judgment  what  was  best  to  be  done."  ** 

In  the  summer  of  A.  D.  359,  more  than  four  hundred 
bishops  assembled  at  Rimini,  of  whom  eighty  were  Arians. 
One  hundred  and  sixty  assembled  at  Seleucia,  of  whom  one 
hundred  and  five  were  Semi-Arians ;  about  forty  were 
Arians,  while  the  Catholics  were  still  fewer  in  number.  A 
civil  officer  of  high  rank  was  appointed  to  represent  the 
emperor  at  each  council,  and  the  one  appointed  to  Rimini 
was  directed  not  to  allow  any  bishop  to  go  home  until  all 
"had  come  to  one  mind  concerning  the  faith."  That  there 

88u  History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  21. 

MHefele's  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  82,  par.  1. 


3Y8  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

might  be  as  little  difficulty  as  possible  in  coming  co  one 
mind,  a  creed  was  drawn  up  and  sent  to  the  council  to  be 
signed.  There  were  at  that  time  present  with  the  emperor 
at  Sirmium  five  bishops,  one  of  whom  was  George  of  Alex- 
andria, and  all  of  whom  were  Arians  or  Semi-Arians.  They 
drew  up  a  creed,  the  main  points  of  which  were  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"We  believe  in  one  only  and  true  God,  the  Father  and  Ruler  of  all, 
Creator  and  Demiurge  of  all  things,  and  in  one  only  begotten  Son  of  God, 
who  was  begotten  of  the  Father  without  change  before  all  ages,  and  all  be- 
ginning, and  all  conceivable  time,  and  all  comprehensible  substance.  .  .  . 
God  from  God,  similar  to  the  Father,  who  has  begotten  him  according 
to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whose  generation  no  one  knows  [understands] 
but  the  Father  who  has  begotten  him.  .  .  .  The  word  ousia,  because  it 
was  used  by  the  Fathers  in  simplicity  [that  is,  with  good  intention],  but 
not  being  understood  by  the  people,  occasions  scandal,  and  is  not  con- 
tained in  the  Scriptures,  shall  be  put  aside,  and  in  future  no  mention 
shall  be  made  of  the  Usia  with  regard  to  God.  .  .  .  But  we  maintain 
that  the  Son  is  similar  to  the  Father  in  all  things,  as  also  the  Holy 
Scriptures  teach  and  say."  so 

The  emperor  sent  a  letter  to  each  council,  commanding 
that  the  bishops  should  settle  the  question  of  the  faith  before 
they  should  have  anything  to  do  with  an  investigation  of  any 
of  their  own  private  differences.  The  council  at  Kimini 
was  already  met,  and  was  earnestly  discussing  the  faith,  when 
the  bishops  arrived  from  Sirmium  with  the  above  creed, 
which  they  read  aloud  to  the  assembly,  and  "declared  that 
it  was  already  confirmed  by  the  emperor,  and  was  now  to  be 
universally  accepted  without  discussion,  as  to  the  sense*which 
individuals  might  attach  to  its  words."  To  this  all  the 
Arians  in  the  council  readily  agreed,  but  the  Catholics,  with 
loud  voices,  proclaimed  their  dissent.  They  declared  that 
any  new  formula  of  faith  was  wholly  unnecessary  ;  that  the 
Council  of  Nice  had  done  all  that  was  necessary  in  regard  to 
the  faith  ;  and  that  the  business  of  the  council  was  not  to 
find  out  what  was  the  true  faith,  but  to  put  to  confusion  all 
its  opponents.  They  demanded  that  the  bishops  who  brought 

30/<*.,  par.  2. 


TUB  EMPEROR' S  CREED  DECLARED  HERETICAL.     379 

this  creed  should  with  them  unanimously  curse  all  heresies, 
and  especially  the  Arian.  This  demand  was  refused  by  the 
Arians.  Then  the  Catholics  took  everything  into  their  own 
hands.  They  unanimously  approved  the  Nicene  Creed, 
especially  the  Homoousion  /  and  then  declared  heretical  the 
creed  which  had  come  from  the  emperor.  They  next  took 
up  the  doctrine  of  Arianism,  and  pronounced  a  curse  upon 
each  particular  point ;  denounced  by  name  the  bishops  who 
had  come  from  the  emperor  as  "ignorant  and  deceitful 
men,  imposters,  and  heretics;  and  declared  them  deposed.1' 
Finally,  they  unanimously  pronounced  a  curse  upon  all  here- 
sies in  general,  and  that  of  Arius  in  particular. 

All  this  they  put  in  writing  ;  every  one  of  them  signed 
it  July  21,  A.  D.  359,  and  sent  it  by  the  ten  deputies,  to  the 
emperor,  accompanied  by  a  request  that  he  would  allow  them 
to  return  to  their  churches.  At  the  same  time  the  Arians  of 
the  council  also  sent  ten  deputies  to  Constantius,  who  reached 
the  emperor  before  the  others,  and  made  their  report. 
When  the  others  arrived,  Constantius  refused  even  to  see 
them  so  much  as  to  receive  their  report,  but  sent  an  officer  to 
receive  it,  and  under  the  pretext  of  being  overwhelmed  with 
public  business,  kept  them  waiting.  After  they  had  waited 
a  long  time,  they  were  directed  to  go  to  Adrianople  and 
await  the  emperor's  pleasure,  and  at  the  same  time  he  sent  a 
letter  to  the  bishops  at  Rimini,  commanding  them  to  wait 
there  the  return  of  their  deputies. 

Shortly  afterwards  the  deputies  were  ordered  to  go  to  a 
small  town  called  Nice,  not  many  miles  from  Adrianople. 
This  was  a  trick  of  the  Arians  and  Semi-Arians,  by  which 
they  proposed  to  have  their  creed  signed  there,  and  then  pass 
it  off  upon  the  uninitiated,  as  the  original  creed  of  the  Council 
of  Nice  in  Bithynia.  There  the  creed  was  presented,  but 
with  the  omission  "in  all  things,"  so  that  it  read,  "the  Son 
is  like  to  the  Father,"  instead  of,  "  like  to  the  Father  in  all 
things."  This  the  deputies  were  required  to  sign,  which  of 
course  they  refused  to  do,  but  were  finally  forced  to  sign  it, 


3§0  ARIANISM  BECOMES   ORTHODOX. 

and  to  reverse  all  the  acts  and  proceedings  of  the  Council  of 
Rimini. 

The  emperor  was  highly  pleased  at  this  result,  and  calling 
it  a  good  omen  of  like  success  with  the  whole  council,  gave 
the  ten  deputies  leave  to  return  to  Rimini.  At  the  same 
time  he  sent  letters  to  the  prefect,  commanding  him  anew 
not  to  allow  a  single  bishop  to  leave  until  all  had  signed, 
and  to  exile  whoever  should  persist  in  a  refusal,  provided 
the  number  did  not  exceed  fifteen. 

The  bishops  were  "eager  to  return  to  their  sees;  the 
emperor  was  inflexible  ;  Taurus  took  care  to  render  the  place 
both  inconvenient  and  disagreeable  to  them.  Some  there- 
fore fell  off,  others  followed  their  example,  the  rest  began 
to  waver,  and  being  so  far  got  the  better  of,  yielded  soon 
after,  and  went  over  to  the  Arian  party  in  such  crowds  that 
in  a  very  short  time  the  number  of  the  orthodox  bishops 
who  continued  steady,  was  reduced  to  twenty."  —  Bower. ^ 

At  the  head  of  these  twenty  was  a  certain  Phsebadius, 
and  they  determined  invincibly  to  hold  their  position. 
Nevertheless  they  were  caught  by  a  trick  that  the  veriest 
tyro  ought  to  have  seen.  Two  bishops  in  particular,  Ursa- 
cius  and  Valens,  had  charge  of  the  creed,  and  they  pretended 
in  the  interests  of  peace  to  be  willing  to  make  a  concession, 
and  to  insert  such  alterations  and  additions  as  might  be 
agreeable  to  Phsebadius,  who  exulted  over  the  proud  dis- 
tinction which  would  thus  be  his  as  the  preserver  of  or- 
thodoxy. 

They  came  together,  and  began  to  reconstruct  the  creed  : 
first  were  inserted  some  curses  against  the  Arian  heresy, 
then  an  addition,  declaring  the  Son  to  be  "equal  to  the 
Father,  without  beginning,  and  before  all  things."  When 
this  was  written,  Talons  proposed  that  in  order  to  leave  no 
room  whatever  for  any  new  disputes  or  any  question  upon 
this  point,  there  should  be  added  a  clause  declaring  that 
"the  Son  of  God  is  not  a  creature  like  other  creatures."  To 

31  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  24. 


THE   WORLD  BECOMES  ARTAN.  381 

« 

this  the  twenty  bishops  assented,  blindly  overlooking  the 
fact  that  in  admitting  that  the  Son  was  not  a  creature  like 
oilier  creatures,  they  did  indeed  place  him  among  the  creat- 
ures, and  admitted  the  very  point  upon  which  the  Arians 
had  all  the  time  insisted.  Thus  all  were  brought  to  ' '  the 
unity  of  the  faith."  The  council  broke  up,  and  the  bishops 
departed  to  their  homes. 

The  council  was  past,  and  no  sooner  did  the  Arians  find 
themselves  secure,  than  they  loudly  proclaimed  the  victory 
which  they  had  gained.  They  gloried  in  the  fact  that  the 
great  council  of  Rimini  had  not  declared  that  the  Son  was 
not  a  creature,  but  only  that  he  was  not  like  other  creatures. 
They  affirmed  that  it  was,  and  always  had  been,  their  opin- 
ion that  the  "  Son  was  no  more  like  the  Father  than  a  piece 
of  glass  was  like  an  emerald."  Upon  examination  of  the 
creed,  the  twenty  bishops  were  obliged  to  confess  that  they 
had  been  entrapped.  They  renounced  the  creed,  and  pub- 
licly retracted  "all  they  had  said,  done,  or  signed,  repugnant 
to  the  truths  of  the  Catholic  Church." — Bower.™ 

The  companion  council  which  was  called  at  Seleucia,  met 
September  27,  359,  but  as  there  were  three  distinct  parties, 
besides  individuals  who  differed  from  all,  there  was  amongst 
them  such  utter  confusion,  tumult,  and  bitterness,  that  after 
four  days  of  angry  debate,  in  which  the  prospect  became 
worse  and  worse,  the  imperial  officer  declared  that  he  would 
have  nothing  more  to  do  with  the  council,  and  told  them 
they  could  go  to  the  church  if  they  wanted  to,  and  "indulge 
in  this  vain  babbling  there  as  much  as  they  pleased."  The 
parties  then  met  separately,  denounced,  condemned,  and  ex- 
communicated one  another,  and  sent  their  deputies  to  Con- 
stantius,  who  spent  a  whole  day  and  the  greater  part  of  the 
night,  December  31,  359,  in  securing  their  signatures  to  the 
confession  of  faith  which  he  had  approved.  The  emperor's 
confession  was  then  published  throughout  the  whole  empire, 
and  all  bishops  were  commanded  to  sign  it,  under  penalty 

s~Td.,  par.  24,  25. 


382  ARIANISM  BECOMES  ORTHODOX. 

of  exile  upon  all  who  refused.  "This  order  was  executed 
with  the  utmost  rigor  in  all  the  provinces  of  the  empire, 
and  very  few  were  found  who  did  not  sign  with  their  hands 
what  they  condemned  in  their  hearts.  Many  who  till  then 
had  been  thought  invincible,  were  overcome,  and  complied 
with  the  times  ;  and  such  as  did  not,  were  driven,  without 
distinction,  from  their  sees  into  exile,  and  others  appointed 
in  their  room,  the  signing  of  that  confession  being  a  qualifi- 
cation indispensably  requisite  both  in  obtaining  and  keeping 
the  episcopal  dignity.  Thus  were  all  the  sees  throughout 
the  empire  filled  with  Arians,  insomuch  that  in  the  whole 
East  not  an  orthodox  bishop  was  left,  and  in  the  West  but 
one  ;  namely,  Gregory,  bishop  of  Elvira  in  Andalusia,  and 
he,  in  all  likelihood,  obliged  to  absent  himself  from  his  flock 
and  lie  concealed. "--Bower.™ 

Thus  Constantius  had  succeeded  much  more  fully  than 
had  his  father,  in  establishing  "the  unity  of  the  faith."  That 
faith  was  the  original  Arian.  And  Arianism  was  now  as 
entirely  orthodox,  and,  if  the  accommodated  sense  of  the 
word  be  used,  as  entirely  Catholic,  as  Athanasianism  had 
ever  been. 

Having  like  his  father,  by  the  aid  of  the  bishops,  united 
the  world  "  under  one  head,"  and  brought  the  opinions  re- 
specting the  Deity  to  a  condition  of  "settled  uniformity," 
the  emperor  Constantius  died  the  following  year,  A.  D.  361. 

33  /</. ,  par.  28. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


THE   CATHOLIC   FAITH    RE-ESTABLISHED. 

THE  emperor  Constantius  was  succeeded  by  Julian,  who 
restored  paganism  as  the  religion  of  the  emperor  and 
the  empire,  and  exerted  his  influence,  though  not  his  power, 
in  favor  of  its  restoration  as  the  religion  of  the  people. 

Julian  refused  to  take  any  part  whatever  in  the  strifes  of 
the  church  parties,  "saying  that  as  he  was  not  so  well 
acquainted  with  the  nature  of  their  disputes  as  a  just  and 
impartial  judge  ought  to  be,  he  hoped  they  would  excuse 
him,  lest  he  should  be  guilty  of  some  injustice."-  —  Bower. ^ 
He  therefore  directed  them  to  settle  their  differences  among 
themselves.  To  this  end  he  issued  an  edict  of  toleration 
to  all  classes  of  Christians,  and  recalled  from  banish- 
ment all  the  bishops  and  clergy  who  had  been  banished 
by  Constantius. 

Thus  there  was  restored  to  the  afflicted  empire  a  condition 
of  peace  and  quietness  such  as  had  not  been  for  fifty  years. 
And  because  of  his  refusal  to  allow  himself  and  his  authority 
to  be  made  the  tool  of  the  riotous  and  bigoted  church  parties 
—  to  this  more  than  to  any  other  one  thing,  is  to  be  attributed 
the  spiteful  epithet  of  "the  apostate,"  which  ever  since 
has  been  affixed  to  his  name.  Pagan  though  he  was,  if  he 
had  like  Constantino  assumed  the  hypocritical  mask  and  had 
played  into  the  hands  of  the  dominant  church  party,  there  is 
no  room  for  doubt  that  he  might,  like  Constantine,  have 
been  an  orthodox  emperor,  with  the  title  of  "the  great." 

1  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Liberius,  par.  29. 

[383] 


384          THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

Under  the  circumstances,  it  would  be  almost  surprising 
if  Julian  had  been  anything  else  than  what  he  was.  His 
own  father,  an  uncle,  and  seven  of  his  cousins,  were  the 
victims  of  a  murder  instigated  by  the  dying  Constantine 
and  faithfully  carried  out  by  Constantius.  Julian  himself, 
though  only  six  years  of  age,  by  the  care  of  some  friends 
barely  escaped  the  same  fate.  Constantius  was  his  cousin, 
and,  as  emperor,  assumed  the  place  of  his  guardian.  "His 
place  of  education  had  been  a  prison,  and  his  subsequent 
liberty  was  watched  with  suspicious  vigilance."  —  Milman* 
He  had  seen  the  streets  of  the  chief  cities  of  the  empire  run 
with  blood,  in  the  savage  strifes  of  church  parties.  Over 
the  bodies  of  slaughtered  people  he  had  seen  bishops  placed 
upon  thrones  of  episcopal  ambition.  Such  impressions 
forced  upon  his  young  mind,  confirmed  by  more  than  twenty 
years'  observation  of  the  violent  and  unchristian  lives  of 
Constantius,  and  hundreds  of  ecclesiastics,  and  multitudes 
of  the  populace,  all  professing  to  be  living  repositories  of 
the  Christian  faith, —  all  this  was  not  the  best  calculated 
to  convince  him  of  the  virtues  of  the  imperial  religion. 

It  is  indeed  charged  that,  in  issuing  the  edict  of  tolera- 
tion, and  the  recall  of  the  exiled  ecclesiastics,  Julian's 
motive  was  to  vent  his  spite  against  Christianity,  by  having 
the  church  parties  destroy  one  another  in  their  contentions. 
Even  if  this  be  true,  if  he  was  to  be  guided  by  the  experience 
and  observations  of  his  whole  life,  he  is  hardly  to  be  blamed 
for  thinking  that  there  was  some  prospect  of  such  a  result. 
No  such  result  followed,  however,  because  when  the  pros- 
pect of  imperial  favor,  and  patronage,  and  power,  was  gone, 
the  church  parties  had  nothing  to  contend  for ;  because 
"  party  passions  among  the  Christians  would,  undoubtedly, 
never  have  risen  to  so  high  a  pitch,  had  it  not  been  for  the 
interference  of  the  State.  As  this  disturbing  and  circum- 
scribing influence  of  a  foreign  power  now  fell  away  of  itself, 
and  the  church  was  left  to  follow  out  naturally  its  own  de- 

2 "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  vi,  par.  9. 


JOVIAN,   VALENTINIAN,  AND    VALENS.  385 

'  velopment  from  within  itself,  the  right  relations  were  every- 
where more  easily  restored."-- JVeander.3 

Julian  died  June  26,  A.  D.  303,  beyond  the  Eiver  Tigris, 
of  a  wound  received  in  a  war  with  Persia,  after  a  reign  of 
one  year,  eight  months,  and  twenty-three  days.  Upon  his 
death,  the  army  in  the  field  elected  Jovian  emperor,  and  re- 
turned to  Antioch.  The  emperor  was  no  sooner  arrived  at 
Antioch  than  the  ecclesiastical  commotion  was  again  renewed. 
The  leaders  of  the  church  parties  endeavored  to  out-do  one 
another  in  their  eager  haste  to  secure  his  support ;  "  for  the. 
heads  of  each  party  assiduously  paid  their  court  to  the  em- 
peror, with  a  view  of  obtaining  not  only  protection  for  them- 
selves, but  also  power  against  their  opponents."  —  Socrates, * 

Among  the  first  of  these  came  the  party  of  Macedonius 
of  Constantinople,  with  a  petition  that  the  emperor  would 
expel  all  the  Arians  from  their  churches,  and  allow  them 
to  take  their  places.  To  this  petition  Jovian  replied,  "I 
abominate  contentiousness  ;  but  I  love  and  honor  those 
who  exert  themselves  to  promote  unanimity."  This  some- 
what checked  the  factious  zeal.  Another  attempt  was  made, 
but  Jovian  declared  "that  he  would  not  molest  any  one  on 
account  of  his  religious  sentiments,  and  that  he  should  love 
and  highly  esteem  such  as  would  zealously  promote  the  unity 
of  the  church."  A  pagan  philosopher  in  an  oration  in  honor 
of  the  emperor,  rebuked  these  parties  with  the  observation 
that  such  persons  worshiped  the  purple  and  not  the  Deity, 
and  resembled  the  uncertain  waves  of  the  sea,  sometimes 
rolling  in  one  direction  and  again  in  the  very  opposite  way  ; 
and  praised  the  emperor  for  his  liberality  in  permitting  every 
one  freely  to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  his 
own  conscience.5 

Jovian,  though  guaranteeing  a  general  toleration,  him- 
self professed  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  a  particular  preference 

3  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  First,  part 
i,  A,  par.  74. 

*  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  iii,  chap.  25.  5/d. 


386  THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

for  Athanasius,  who  at  his  invitation  visited  Antioch,  and 
after  having  settled  the  faith  of  the  emperor,  and  promised 
him  "a  long  and  peaceful  reign,"  returned  to  his  episcopal 
seat  at  Alexandria.  The  long  and  peaceful  reign  assured 
by  the  zealous  ecclesiastic  continued  only  about  two  months 
from  this  time,  and  ended  in  the  death  of  Jovian,  February 
17,  A.  D.  364,  after  a  total  reign  of  seven  months  and  twenty- 
one  days  from  the  death  of  Julian. 

Ten  days  after  the  death  of  Jovian,  Yalentinian  was 
chosen  emperor,  and  thirty  days  after  this  he  bestowed 
upon  his  brother  Valens  ^an  equal  share  in  the  imperial 
dignity.  Yalens  assumed  the  jurisdiction  of  the  whole 
East,  with  his  capital  at  Constantinople.  Yalentinian  re- 
tained the  dominion  of  the  West,  with  his  capital  at  Milan. 
Both  of  these  emperors  pursued  the  tolerant  policy  of 
Jovian,  so  far  as  paganism  and  the  church  parties  were  con- 
cerned ;  but  they  let  loose  a  cruel  persecution  upon  the  pro- 
fession of  "magic." 

The  practice  of  magic  was  made  treason,  and  under  the 
accusations  of  sorcery  and  witchcraft,  an  infinite  number 
and  variety  of  individual  spites  and  animosities  were  let 
loose,  and  it  seemed  as  though  the  horrors  of  the  days  of 
Tiberius  and  Domitian  were  returned.  Rome  and  Antioch 
were  the  two  chief  seats  of  the  tribunals  of  this  persecution, 
and  iCfrom  the  extremities  of  Italy  and  Asia,  the  young  and 
the  aged  were  dragged  in  chains  to  the  tribunals  of  Rome 
and  Antioch.  Senators,  matrons,  and  philosophers  expired 
in  ignominious  and  cruel  tortures.  The  soldiers  who  were 
appointed  to  guard  the  prisons,  declared,  with  a  murmur  of 
pity  and  indignation,  that  their  numbers  were  insufficient  to 
oppose  the  flight  or  resistance  of  the  multitude  of  captives. 
The  wealthiest  families  were  ruined  by  fines  and  confisca- 
tions ;  the  most  innocent  citizens  trembled  for  their  safety." 
—  Gibbon* 

In  370  Yalens  cast  his  influence  decidedly  in  favor  of 
the  Arian  faith,  by  receiving  baptism  at  the  hands  of  the 

6  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxv,  par.  9. 


THE   CONTENTIONS^  BEGIN  AGAIN.  387 

Arian  bishop  of  Constantinople.  The  tumults  of  the  re- 
ligious parties  again  began,  and  "every  episcopal  vacancy 
was  the  occasion  of  a  popular  tumult  ...  as  the  leaders 
both  of  the  Homoousians  and  of  the  Arians  believed  that  if 
they  were  not  suffered  to  reign,  they  were  most  cruelly 
injured  and  oppressed.  ...  In  every  contest,  the  Catholics 
were  obliged  to  pay  the  penalty  of  their  own  faults,  and  of 
those  of  their  adversaries.  In  every  election,  the  claims  of 
the  Arian  candidate  obtained  the  preference,  and  if  they 
were  opposed  by  the  majority  of  the  people,  he  was  usually 
supported  by  the  authority  of  the  civil  magistrate,  or  even 
by  the  terrors  of  a  military  force.''  -  Gibbon.1 

In  373  Athanasius  died,  and  the  emperor  Yalens  com- 
manded the  prefect  of  Egypt  to  install  in  the  vacant 
bishopric  an  Arian  prelate  by  the  name  of  Lucius,  which 
was  done,  but  not  without  the  accompaniment  of  riot  and 
bloodshed  which  was  now  hardly  more  than  a  part  of  the 
regular  ceremony  of  induction  into  office  of  the  principal 
bishoprics  of  the  empire. 

In  the  West,  after  the  death  of  Constantius,  the  bishops 
returned  to  the  faith  established  by  the  Council  of  Nice, 
which  so  largely  prevailed  there  that  the  differences  spring- 
ing from  the  Arian  side  caused  no  material  difficulty.  As 
before  stated,  Valentinian  suffered  all  religious  parties,  even 
the  pagan,  to  continue  unmolested  ;  yet  he  himself  was  always 
a  Catholic.  About  the  year  307  he  greatly  increased  the 
dignity  and  authority  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  by  publishing  a 
law  empowering  him  to  examine,  and  sit  as  judge,  upon  the 
cases  of  other  bishops.  In  375  Valentinian  died,  and  was 
succeeded  by  his  two  sons,  Gratian,  aged  sixteen  years,  and 
Valentinian  II,  aged  four  years. 

Gratian  was  but  the  tool  of  the  bishops.  Ambrose  was  at 
that  time  bishop  of  Milan,  and  never  was  episcopal  ambition 
more  arrogantly  asserted  than  in  that  insolent  prelate.  Soon 
the  mind  of  the  bishop  asserted  the  supremacy  over  that  of 
the  boy  emperor,  and  Ambrose  "wielded  at  his  will  the 

7  Id.,  par.  13. 
31 


388          THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

weak  and  irresolute  Gratian."  —  Milman*  But  above  all 
things  else  that  Gratian  did,  that  which  redounded  most  to 
the  glory  of  the  Catholic  Church  was  his  choice  of  Theodo- 
sius  as  associate  emperor.  Yalens  was  killed  in  a  battle  with 
the  Goths,  A.  D.  378.  A  stronger  hand  than  that  of  a  youth 
of  nineteen  was  required  to  hold  the  reins  of  government  in 
the  East. 

In  the  establishment  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the  place  of 
Theodosius  is  second  only  to  that  of  Constantine.  About 
the  beginning  of  the  year  380  he  was  baptized  by  the  Catho- 
lic bishop  of  Thessalonica,  arid  immediately  afterward  he 
issued  the  following  edict :  — 

"It  is  our  pleasure  that  the  nations  which  are  governed  by  our  clemency 
and  moderation,  should  steadfastly  adhere  to  the  religion  which  was 
taught  by  St.  Peter  to  the  Romans,  which  faithful  tradition  has  pre- 
served, and  which  is  now  professed  by  the  pontiff  Damasus,  and  by 
Peter,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  a  man  of  apostolic  holiness.  According  to 
the  discipline  of  the  apostles,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  let  us  be- 
lieve the  sole  deity  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost :  under 
an  equal  majesty,  and  a  pious  Trinity.  We  authorize  the  followers  of 
this  doctrine  to  assume  the  title  of  Catholic  Christians  ;  and  as  we  judge 
that  all  others  are  extravagant  madmen,  we  brand  them  with  the  infa- 
mous name  of  "  heretics,"  and  declare  that  their  conventicles  shall  no 
longer  usurp  the  respectable  appellation  of  churches.  Besides  the  con- 
demnation of  divine  justice,  they  must  expect  to  suffer  the  severe  penalties 
which  our  authority,  guided  by  heavenly  wisdom,  shaH  think  proper  to 
inflict  upon  them."9 

This  law  was  issued  in  the  names  of  the  three  emperors, 
Gratian,  Valentinian  II,  and  Theodosius.  '*  Thus  the  relig- 
ion of  the  whole  Roman  world  was  enacted  by  two  feeble 
boys  and  a  rude  Spanish  soldier."  —  Milman.™ 

In  Constantinople  the  Catholics  were  so  few  that  at  the 
accession  of  Theodosius  they  had  no  regular  place  of  meet- 
ing, nor  had  they  any  pastor.  No  sooner  was  the  new 
emperor  proclaimed,  however,  than  they  called  to  their  aid 

8 "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap.  viii.  par.  28. 
"Gibbon's  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxvii,  par.  6. 
10  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ix,  par.  1. 


THE  ORDER   OF   THE  HIERARCHY.  389 

Gregory,  bishop  and  native  of  Nazianzum,  and  hence  called 
Gregory  Nazianzen.  A  room  in  a  private  house  was  fitted 
up  as  the  place  of  meeting,  and  Gregory  began  his  ministry 
in  the  imperial  city.  The  quarrel  between  the  religious 
parties  again  broke  out  into  open  riot.  A  great  crowd  led 
on  by  monks  and  women,  with  clubs,  stones,  and  fire- 
brands, attacked  the  meeting-place  of  the  Catholics,  broke 
down  the  doors,  and  ravaged  the  place  inside  and  outside. 
Blood  was  shed,  lives  were  lost,  and  Gregory  was  accused 
before  the  magistrate  ;  but  upon  the  strength  of  the  impe- 
rial edict  establishing  the  Catholic  religion,  he  secured 
his  acquittal. 

And  now  the  contentions  began  among  the  Catholics  them- 
selves. The  occasion  of  it  was  this  :  As  soon  as  Constantino 
had  become  sole  emperor  by  the  murder  of  Licinius,  he  pro- 
ceeded to  complete  the  organization  of  the  government  of 
the  empire  which  had  been  planned,  and  in  a  manner  be- 
gun, by  Diocletian.  He  divided  the  empire  into  prefect- 
ures, dioceses  and  provinces.  Of  the  provinces  there  were 
one  hundred  and  sixteen,  of  the  dioceses,  thirteen,  of  the 
prefectures,  four. 

The  heads  of  the  prefectures  were  entitled  prefects. 
The  heads  of  the  dioceses  were  entitled  vicars  or  vice- 
prefects.  The  heads  of  the  provinces  were  designated  by 
different  titles,  of  which  the  term  "governor"  will  be  suffi- 
ciently exact. 

The  governors  were  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
vicars,  or  vice-prefects ;  the  vicars  or  vice-prefects  were 
subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  prefects  ;  and  the  prefects 
were  subject  to  the  immediate  jurisdiction  of  the  emperor 
himself. 

Now  when  the  Church  and  the  State  became  one,  the 
organization  of  the  church  was  made  to  conform  as  pre- 
cisely as  possible  to  that  of  the  empire.  In  fact,  so  far 
as  the  provinces  and  the  dioceses,  the  organization  of  the 
church  was  identical  with  that  of  the  empire.  There  was  u 


390          THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

gradation  in  the  order  and  dignity  of  the  bishoprics  accord- 
ing to  the  political  divisions  thus  formed. 

The  dignity  of  the  chief  bishop  in  a  province  or  diocese 
was  regulated  by  the  chief  city.  The  bishop  of  the  chief 
city  in  a  province  was  the  principal  bishop  of  that  province, 
and  all  the  other  bishops  in  the  province,  were  subject  to 
his  jurisdiction  ;  to  him  pertained  the  ordination  to  vacant 
bishoprics  and  all  other  matters.  The  bishop  of  the  princi- 
pal city  in  the  diocese  was  chief  bishop  of  that  diocese,  and 
all  other  bishops  within  said  diocese  were  subject  to  his 
jurisdiction. 

The  chief  bishop  of  the  province  was  called  "  Metropoli- 
tan," from  the  metropolis  or  chief  city,  or  "primate"  from 
primus,  first.  The  chief  bishop  of  a  diocese  was  called 
"exarch."  Above  these  were  four  bishops  corresponding  to 
the  four  prefects,  and  were  called  "patriarchs,"  yet  these 
were  not  apportioned  according  to  the  lines  of  the  prefect- 
ures, but  were  bishops  of  the  four  chief  cities  of  the  empire, 
—  Home,  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Constantinople. 

This  was  the  general  plan  of  the  organization  of  the 
church,  though  through  the  mutual  ambitions  and  jealousies 
of  the  whole  hierarchy,  there  were  many  exceptions  ;  and  as 
time  went  on,  titles  and  jurisdictions  overran  the  limits  de- 
fined in  this  general  plan. 

The  bishopric  of  Alexandria  had  always  been  held  as 
second  only  to  that  of  Rome  in  dignity,  since  Alexandria 
was  the  second  city  of  the  empire.  Constantinople  was  now 
an  imperial  city,  and  its  bishopric  was  fast  assuming  an  im- 
portance which  rivaled  that  of  Alexandria  for  second  place. 
To  this  the  archbishop  of  Alexandria  did  not  propose  to 
assent.  That  Peter,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  whom  the  edict 
of  Theodosius  had  advertised  and  indorsed  as  a  man  of  apos- 
tolic holiness,  asserted  his  episcopal  jurisdiction  over  Con- 
stantinople. He  sent  up  seven  Alexandrians,  who  ordained 
a  certain  Maximus  to  be  bishop  of  Constantinople.  A  tumult 
was  raised,  and  Maximus  was  driven  out  by  the  party  of 


GREGORY,  BISHOP  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE.          391 

Gregory.  He  fled  to  Theodosius,  but  his  claim  was  rejected 
by  the  emperor  also. 

Theodosius  soon  came  to  Constantinople,  and  immedi- 
ately on  his  arrival,  summoned  to  his  palace  -Damophilus, 
the  Arian  bishop  of  the  city,  and  commanded  him  to  sub- 
scribe to  the  Niceiie  Creed,  or  else  surrender-  to  the  Catholics 
the  episcopal  palace,  the  cathedral,  and  all  the  churches  of 
the  city,  which  amounted  to  fully  a  hundred.  Damophilus 
refused,  and  November  24,  A.  D.  380,  an  edict  was  issued 
expelling  all  the  Arians  from  all  their  houses  of  worship, 
and  forfeiting  the  same  to  the  Catholics,  who  in  fact  were 
barely  able  to  fill  the  single  house  of  worship  which  they 
already  owned. 

Damophilus  was  exiled,  and  Gregory,  accompanied  by 
the  emperor  and  surrounded  by  armed  troops,  was  conducted 
to  the  cathedral,  which  was  already  occupied  by  a  body  of 
imperial  guards,  where  he  was  regularly  installed  in  the  office 
of  bishop  of  Constantinople.  "  He  beheld  the  innumerable 
multitude  of  either  sex  and  of  every  age,  who  crowded  the 
streets,  the  windows,  and  the  roofs  of  the  houses  ;  he  heard 
the  tumultuous  voice  of  rage,  grief,  astonishment,  and  de- 
spair ;  and  Gregory  fairly  confesses,  that  on  the  memorable 
day  of  his  installation,  the  capital  of  the  East  wore  the  ap- 
pearance of  a  city  taken  by  storm,  in  the  hands  of  a  barba- 
rian conquerer." — Gibbon.11 

At  the  beginning  of  the  year  381  Theodosius  issued  an 
edict  expelling  from  all  the  churches  within  his  dominions,  all 
the  bishops  and  other  ecclesiastics  who  should  refuse  to  sub- 
scribe to  the  creed  of  Nice.  By  a  commissioned  officer  with 
a  military  force,  the  edict  was  executed  in  all  the  provinces 
of  the  East.  Having  thus  established  his  religion  through- 
out the  empire,  the  next  thing  to  do  was  to  have  a  general 
council  indorse  his  action,  compose  the  disputes  which  dis- 
turbed the  Catholic  party  itself,  and  again  settle  the  faith  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  To  this  end  a  general  council  was 
called  to  meet  at  Constantinople  this  same  year,  A.  D.  381. 

11  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxvii,  par.  3. 


392          THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

The  council  met  in  the  month  of  May,  and  was  composed 
of  one  hundred  and  eighty-six  bishops  —  one  hundred  and 
fifty  Catholics,  and  thirty-six  Macedonians.  The  first  ques- 
tion considered  was  the  disputed  bishopric  of  Constantinople. 
For  that  Maximus  who  had  been  ordained  at  the  direction  of 
Peter  of  Alexandria,  though  disallowed  by  the  emperor,  still 
claimed  to  be  the  regular  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  ex- 
ercised the  office  by  ordaining  other  bishops.  The  council, 
however,  adjudged  his  ordination  to  be  irregular  ;  declared 
that  he  was  not,  and  had  never  been,  a  bishop  ;  and  that 
therefore  all  the  ordinations  performed  by  him  were  null 
and  void.  The  appointment  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  was 
then  confirmed,  by  regular  services  of  installation. 

The  next  question  that  was  considered  by  the  council  was 
of  the  same  nature  as  the  foregoing,  but  one  of  much  more 
far-reaching  consequences,  as  it  involved  both  the  East  and 
the  West.  Just  fifty  years  before  —  A.  D.  331  —  Eustathius, 
the  Catholic  bishop  of  Antioch,  had  been  displaced  by  an 
Arian,  who  was  received  by  the  greater  part  of  the  Catholics 
as  well  as  the  Ariaus  ;  but  a  small  party  still  adhered  to 
his  cause,  and  declared  they  would  acknowledge  no  other 
bishop,  and  have  no  fellowship  with  any  of  the  others, 
as  long  as  he  lived.  From  this  they  acquired  the  name  of 
Eustathians.  Thirty  years  afterward  —  A.  D.  360  —  the  see 
of  Antioch  became  vacant  by  the  translation  of  its  bishop  to 
that  of  Constantinople,  and  the  two  parties  agreed  upon  a 
certain  Meletius  to  fill  the  vacant  bishopric.  No  sooner  had 
he  been  installed,  than  he  openly  declared  for  the  Ilomoou- 
sion,  and  excommunicated  "as  rotten  and  incurable  mem- 
bers," all  who  held  the  contrary  doctrine.  The  bishops 
round  about  plead  with  him  to  conduct  his  office  in  the  spirit 
in  which  he  had  been  elected  to  it,  instead  of  making 
matters  worse  by  his  extreme  position. 

It  was  all  of  no  avail.  He  declared  that  u  nothing 
should,  and  nothing  could,  make  him  desist  from,  or  relent 
in,  the  work  he  had  undertaken,  till  he  had  utterly  ex-' 


THE  MELETIAN  SCHISM.  393 

tirpated  the  Arian  heresy,  without  leaving  the  least  shoot 
of  so  poisonous  a  weed  in  the  field,  which  by  divine  ap- 
pointment he  was  to  guard  and  cultivate."  -Bower.™  The 
Arians  then  applied  to  Constantius,  and  had  Meletius  ban- 
ished thirty  days  after  his  installation. 

The  partisans  of  Meletius  then  separated  entirely  from 
the  Arians,  and  clung  so  tenaciously  to  this  course,  that 
they  acquired  the  name  of  Meletians.  This  created  a  third 
party,  because  the  Eustathians  refused  to  have  anything 
at  all  to  do  with  either  the  Meletians  or  the  Arians  — 
with  the  Arians  because  they  were  Arians  ;  with  the  Mele- 
tians because  they  had  communicated  with  the  Arians,  arid 
because  they  still  acknowledged  Meletius,  who  had  been 
chosen  with  the  help  of  the  Arians.  Thus  there  were  two 
parties  of  the  Catholics,  each  arrayed  against  the  other. 

•In  363  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  the  same  who  had  been  the 
messenger  of  Liberius  to  Constantius  at  Milan,  attempted  to 
reconcile  the  two  Catholic  factions  ;  but  being  more  anxious 
to  display  authority  than  to  promote  real  peace,  he  made 
the  matter  worse  by  ordaining  as  bishop  a  certain  Paulinus, 
who  was  the  leader  of  the  Eustathians,  and  the  most  bitter 
opponent  of  the  Meletians.  From  this  the  schism  spread 
yet  farther.  Lucifer  was  not  only  a  Western  bishop,  but 
had  been  a  confidant  of  the  bishop  of  Rome.  Athanasius 
indorsed  his  action  by  communicating  with  Paulinus,  and 
not  with  Meletius ;  and  all  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  Cyprus, 
and  the  West  followed  his  example,  while  all  the  rest  of  the 
Catholic  bishops  in  the  East  espoused  the  cause  of  Meletius. 

Basil,  the  Catholic  bishop  of  Csesarea  in  Cappadocia, 
finding  it  impossible  to  moderate  the  schism  in  any  other 
way,  thought  to  do  so  by  applying  to  the  bishop  of  Rome. 
He  therefore  —  A.  D.  371  —  wrote  a  letter  to  Damasus,  and 
with  it  sent  another  signed  by  many  of  the  Eastern  bishops, 
asking  him  to  lend  his  assistance.  "He  added  that  it  was 
from  his  zeal  alone  they  expected  relief,  from  that  zeal 
which  he  had  made  so  eminently  appear  on  other  occasions  ; 

12  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  16. 


394  THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

that  Dionysius,  one  of  his  predecessors,  had  afforded  them 
a  seasonable  assistance,  when  their  wants  were  less  press- 
ing, and  their  condition  not  so  deplorable ;  and  therefore 
that  there  was  no  room  left  to  doubt  of  his  readily  conform- 
ing to  so  glorious  an  example."-  —Rower.™ 

It  was  some  time  before  Damasus  took  any  notice  of  this 
request,  and  when  he  did,  it  was  only  to  assume  the  office 
of  dictator  and  judge,  rather  than  that  of  mediator.  He 
declared  Paulinus  lawful  bishop  of  Antioch,  and  Meletius 
"a  transgressor  of  the  canons,  an  intruder,  a  schismatic, 
and  even  a  heretic."  -Bower.™  Basil  repented  of  his  ap- 
plication to  Rome,  with  the  wise  observation  that  "  the  more 
you  flatter  haughty  and  insolent  men,  the  more  haughty  and 
insolent  they  become."  He  should  have  thought  of  that 
before,  and  indulged  in  neither  flattery  nor  appeal. 

Such  was  the  grave  question,  and  thus  that  question 
arose,  which  now  engaged  the  serious  attention  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Constantinople  ;  and  Meletius  presided  at  the  council. 
Before  they  reached  this  subject,  however,  Meletius  died. 
He  and  Paulinus  had  previously  agreed  that  when  either  of 
them  should  die,  the  other  should  be  sole  bishop  of  the  two 
factions  ;  but  he  was  no  sooner  dead  than  some  of  the  bish- 
ops in  the  council  moved  for  the  election  of  a  successor. 

Gregory  IS^azianzen  was  now  president  of  the  council, 
and  he  exerted  all  his  influence  to  persuade  the  council  to 
put  an  end  to  the  schism  by  having  nothing  more  to  do  with 
it,  but  to  let  Paulinus  end  his  days  in  peace,  according  to 
the  arrangement  with  Meletius.  He  was  joined  by  other 
members  of  the  council,  but  the  vast  majority  loved  discus- 
sion more  than  they  loved  anything  else  than  power,  and  as 
disputes  and  schisms  were  the  way  to  power,  they  could  not 
bear  to  let  slip  such  an  opportunity  to  show  that  the  East 
was  not  subject  to  the  West  —  especially  as  the  Western 
bishops,  with  the  bishop  of  Rome  at  their  head,  had  already 
assumed  the  authority  to  dictate  in  the  matter.  They  de- 

13  Id.,  par.  19.  uld.,  par.  20. 


THE  COUNCIL   OF  CONSTANTINOPLE.  395 

dared  that  they  would  not  betray  to  the  West  the  dignity 
which  of  right  belonged  to  the  East,  from  its  being  the  scene 
of  the  birth  and  death  of  the  Son  of  God.  They  therefore 
elected  Flavianus  as  successor  to  Meletius,  and  thus  only 
aggravated  the  schism  which  they  attempted  to  heal,  and 
which  continued  for  eighteen  years  longer. 

Gregory  Nazianzen  having  done  all  he  could  to  prevent 
this  act  of  the  council,  arid  knowing  that  what  they  had  done 
could  only  strengthen  the  contentions  already  rife,  resigned 
his  bishopric,  and  left  both  the  council  and  the  city  of  Con- 
stantinople. He  likened  a  church  council  to  a  nest  of  wasps, 
or  a  flock  of  magpies,  cranes,  or  geese  ;  declared  that  no  good 
ever  came  of  one  ;  and  refused  ever  more  to  have  anything 
to  do  with  them.15  Had  a  few  other  men  been  as  wise  as 
Gregory  Nazianzen  showed  himself  to  be  in  this  case,  what 
miseries  the  world  might  have  escaped  !  how  different  his- 
tory would  have  been  !  As  Gregory  has  been,  for  ages,  a 
Catholic  saint,  even  the  Catholic  Church  ought  not  to  blame 
any  one  for  adopting  his  estimate  of  the  value  of  church 
councils. 

Gregory's  resignation  made  it'  necessary  to  elect  a  new 
bishop  of  Constantinople.  The  choice  fell  upon  Nectarius, 
a  senator  and  praetor  of  the  city,  who  hud  never  yet  been 
baptized.  He  was  first  elected  bishop,  next  baptized  into 
membership  of  the  church,  and  then  by  the  bishops  of  the 
council  was  installed  in  his  new  office. 

Having  "settled"  these  things,  the  council  proceeded 
to  settle  the  Catholic  faith  again.  The  same  question  which 
had  been  so  long  discussed  as  to  the  nature  of  Christ,  was 
up  now  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Now, 
the  question  was  whether  the  Holy  Spirit  is  Ilomomi- 
sion  with  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The  Macedonians  held 
that  it  is  not.  The  council  decided  that  it  is.  The  Mace- 


16  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxvii,  par.  9;  Scbaff's  "History  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  65,  last  par.  but  one;  Stanley's  "  History  of  the  East- 
ern Church,"  Lecture  ii,  par.  10  from  the  end. 


396  THE   CATHOLIC1  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

donians  left  the  assembly,  and  the  remaining  one  hundred 
and  fifty  bishops  framed  the  following  creed  :  — 

"We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Creator  of  heaven 
and  earth,  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible.  And  in  one  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  be- 
fore all  times  [ages],  Light  from  Light,  very  God  from  very  God,  be- 
gotten, not  created,  of  the  same  substance  with  the  Father,  by  whom  all 
things  were  made  ;  who  for  us  men,  and  for  our  salvation,  came  down 
from  heaven,  and  was  incarnate  by  the  Holy  Ghost  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
and  was  made  man  ;  who  was  crucified  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate,  suf- 
fered and  was  buried,  and  the  third  day  he  rose  again  according  to  the 
Scriptures,  and  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of 
the  Father ;  and  he  shall  come  again  with  glory  to  judge  both  the  living 
and  the  dead  ;  whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end.  And  we  believe  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord  and  Life-giver,  who  proceedeth  from  the 
Father  ;  who  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  together  is  worshiped  and 
glorified  ;  who  spake  by  the  prophets.  And  in  one  Holy  Catholic  and 
apostolic  Church.  We  acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of 
sins.  We  look  for  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world 
to  come.  Amen."16 

They  also  established  seven  canons,  in  one  of  which  they 
attempted  to  settle  the  question  of  dignity  between  the 
bishops  of  Alexandria  and  Constantinople  by  ordaining  as 
follows  :  — 

"CANON  3.  The  bishop  of  Constantinople  shall  hold  the  first  rank 
after  the  bishop  of  Rome,  because  Constantinople  is  New  Rome."17 

This,  however,  like  every  other  attempt  to  settle  their 
ecclesiastical  disputes,  only  bred  new  and  more  violent  con- 
tentions. For,  by  a  trick  in  words,  and  a  casuistical  inter- 
pretation, this  canon  was  afterward  made  the  ground  upon 
which  was  claimed  by  the  bishopric  of  Constantinople,  supe- 
riority over  that  of  Rome.  It  was  argued  that  the  words 
''the  first  rank  after  the  bishop  of  Rome,"  did  not  mean  the 
second  in  actual  rank,  but  the  first,  and  really  carried  pre«- 
cedence  over  Old  Rome  ;  that  the  real  meaning  was  that 
hitherto  Rome  had  held  the  first  rank,  but  now  Constan- 

16Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  97. 
17 Id.,  sec.  98. 


COUNCIL    OF  AQUILEIA.  397 

tinople  should  hold  the  first  rank,  i.  e.,  after  Rome  had 
held  it ! 

The  bishops  in  council,  having  finished  their  labors,  sent 
to  Theodosius  the  following  letter  :  — 

"In  obedience  to  your  letters,  we  met  together  at  Constantinople, 
and  having  first  restored  union  among  ourselves,  we  then  made  short 
definitions  confirming  the  faith  of  the  Fathers  of  Nicaea,  and  condemn- 
ing the  heresies  which  have  risen  in  opposition  to  it.  We  have  also,  for 
the  sake  of  ecclesiastical  order,  drawn  up  certain  canons  ;  and  all  this 
we  append  to  our  letter.  We  pray  you  now,  of  your  goodness,  to  con- 
firm by  a  letter  of  your  piety  the  decision  of  the  synod,  that,  as  you  have 
honored  the  church  by  your  letters  of  convocation,  you  would  thus  seal 
the  decisions."18 

Accordingly,  the  emperor  confirmed  and  sealed  their  de- 
cisions in  an  edict  issued  July  30,  381,  commanding  that 
"all  the  churches  were  at  once  to  be  surrendered  to  the 
bishops  who  believed  in  the  oneness  of  the  Godhead  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  were  in  com- 
munion with  JSfectarius  of  Constantinople  ;  in  Egypt  with 
Timotheus  of  Alexandria  ;  in  the  East  with  Pelagius  of  Lao- 
dicea  and  Diodorus  of  Tarsus  ;  in  proconsular  Asia  and  the 
Asiatic  diocese  with  Amphilochius  of  Iconium  and  Optimus 
of  Antioch  (in  Pisidia)  ;  in  the  diocese  of  Pontus  with  Hella- 
dius  of  Csesarea,  Otreius  of  Melitene,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  ; 
lastly  (in  Mcesia  and  Scythia)  with  Terentius,  the  bishop  of 
Scythia  (Tomi),  and  with  Martyrius,  bishop  of  Marcianople 
(now  Preslaw  in  Bulgaria).  All  who  were  not  in  communion 
with  the  above-named,  should,  as  avowed  heretics,  be  driven 
from  the  church." — Hefele.19 

While  the  Council  of  Constantinople  was  sitting,  the 
emperor  Gratian  called  a  council  at  Aquileia  in  Italy.  This 
was  presided  over  by  the  bishop  of  Aquileia,  but  Ambrose, 
bishop  of  Milan,  "  was  the  most  active  member  and  soul  of  the 
whole  affair."  The  object  of  this  council  was,  in  unison  with 
the  Council  of  Constantinople,  to  establish  the  unity  of  the 
faith  throughout  the  whole  world.  There  happened  to  be 

18  Id.,  sec.  99. 


398  THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

three  bishops  in  all  the  West  who  were  accused  of  being 
Arians.  They  would  not  acknowledge  that  they  were  such  ; 
but  the  accusation  of  heresy  was  sufficient  foundation  upon 
which  to  call  a  council. 

The  council  met  in  August,  and  after  several  preliminary 
meetings,  met  in  formal  session,  the  third  of  September. 
A  letter  which  Arius  had  written  to  his  bishop,  Alexander, 
about  sixty  years  before,  was  read,  and  the  three  accused 
bishops  were  required  to  say  "yes"  or  "no,"  as  to  whether 
or  not  they  agreed  to  "these  blasphemies  against  the  Son." 
They  would  not  give  a  direct  answer,  choosing  rather  to 
speak  for  themselves  than  to  answer  by  an  emphatic  "yes" 
or  "no,"  questions  that  were  framed  by  their  accusers. 
The  council  next  spun  out  a  string  of  curses  upon  all  the 
leading  points  of  the  Arian  doctrine  ;  and  because  the  three 
bishops  would  not  join  in  these  curses,  the  council,  at  the 
proposal  of  Ambrose,  and  as  early  as  one  o'clock  on  the 
afternoon  of  the  first  day,  pronounced  its  curse  upon  the 
three  bishops  as  heretics,  declaring  them  deposed  from 
office,  and  immediately  sent  a  circular  letter  to  this  effect  to 
all  the  bishops  of  the  West.  They  next  sent  a  full  account 
of  their  proceedings,  according  to  their  own  view,  "to  the 
emperors  Gratian,  Yalentinian  II,  and  Theodosius,  and 
prayed  them  to  lend  the  aid  of  the  secular  arm,  in  the 
actual  deposition  of  the  condemned,  and  the  appointment 
of  orthodox  bishops  in  their  stead."  They  also  asked  the 
emperor  Theodosius  to  make  it  impossible  for  the  teacher  of 
one  of  these  condemned  bishops  any  "further  to  disturb 
the  peace  of  the  church  or  to  travel  about  from  one  town 
to  another. "  —  Ilefele. 20 

With  Damasus,  bishop  of  Rome,  this  council  disagreed 
with  that  of  Constantinople,  upon  the  dispute  between  the 
Eustathians  and  Meletians,  and  a  letter  was  therefore  sent 
to  the  emperor,  asking  for  another  general  council  to  be 
held  at  Alexandria,  to  decide  this,  with  other  disputes 
among  the  Catholics  themselves. 

20  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,'1  sec.  101,  par.  1,  3. 


PENALTIES   UPON  HERETICS.  399 

The  condemned  bishops  complained  that  they  were  mis- 
represented in  the  letters  of  the  council,  and  protested 
against  being  confounded  with  the  Arians.  They  likewise 
demanded  another  council,  to  be  held  at  Rome.  When 
these  letters  reached  Theodosius,  the  Council  of  Constanti- 
nople was  over,  and  the  bishops  had  gone  home.  But 
instead  of  calling  the  council  to  meet  at  Alexandria,  he  re- 
called the  bishops  to  Constantinople.  He  sent  two  special 
invitations  to  Gregory  Nazianzen  to  attend  the  council,  but 
Gregory,  still  retaining  the  wisdom  he  had  acquired  at  the 
preceding  council,  positively  refused,  with  the  words,  "I 
never  yet  saw  a  council  of  bishops  come  to  a  good  end.  I 
salute  them  from  afar  off,  since  I  know  how  troublesome 
they  are."21 

By  the  time  the  bishops  were  again  got  together  at  Con- 
stantinople, it  was  early  in  the  summer  of  382.  They  there 
received  another  letter  from  a  council  which  had  just  been 
held  under  the  presidency  of  Ambrose,  at  Milan,  asking 
them  to  attend  a  general  council  at  Rome.  The  bishops 
remained  at  Constantinople,  but  sent  three  of  their  number 
as  their  representatives,  and  also  a  letter  affirming  their 
strict  adherence  to  the  Nicene  Creed.  Lack  of  time  and 
space  alike  forbid  that  the  proceedings  of  these  councils 
should  be  followed  in  detail.  Council  after  council  followed  ; 
another  one  at  Constantinople  in  383,  at  Bordeaux  in  384, 
at  Treves  in  385,  at  Rome  in  386,  at  Antioch  in  388,  at  Car- 
thage in  389,  Rome  again  in  390,  Carthage  again  in  390, 
Capua  in  391,  at  Hippo  in  393,  at  Nisines  in  394,  and  at 
Constantinople  again  in  394. 

On  his  part  Theodosius  was  all  this  time  doing  all  he 
could  to  second  the  efforts  of  the  church  to  secure  unanimity 
of  faith,  and  to  blot  out  all  heresy.  "  In  the  space  of  fifteen 
years  he  promulgated  at  least  fifteen  severe  edicts  against 
the  heretics,  more  especially  against  those  who  rejected  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity."--  Gibbon™  In  these  edicts  it  was 

21  Stanley's  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  ii,  par.  10  from  the  end. 
252  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxvii,  par.  11. 


400          THE   CATHOLIC  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

enacted  that  any  of  the  heretics  who  should  usurp  the  title 
of  bishop  or  presbyter,  should  suffer  the  penalty  of  exile  and 
confiscation  of  goods,  if  they  attempted  either  to  preach 
the  doctrine  or  practice  the  rites  of  their  "  accursed"  sects. 
A  fine  of  about  twenty  thousand  dollars  was  pronounced 
upon  every  person  who  should  dare  to  confer,  or  receive,  or 
promote,  the  ordination  of  a  heretic.  Any  religious  meet- 
ings of  the  heretics,  whether  public  or  private,  whether  by 
day  or  by  night,  in  city  or  country,  were  absolutely  prohib- 
ited ;  and  if  any  such  meeting  was  held,  the  building  or 
even  the  ground  which  should  be  used  for  the  purpose,  was 
declared  confiscated.  "The  anathemas  of  the  church  were 
fortified  by  a  sort  of  civil  excommunication,"  which  sepa- 
rated the  heretics  from  their  fellow-citizens  by  disqualifying 
them  from  holding  any  public  office,  trust,  or  employment. 
The  heretics  who  made  a  distinction  in  the  nature  of  the  Son 
from  that  of  the  Father,  were  declared  incapable  of  either 
making  wills  or  receiving  legacies.  The  Manichsean  here- 
tics were  to  be  punished  with  death,  as  were  also  the  heretics 
"who  should  dare  to  perpetrate  the  atrocious  crime"  of 
celebrating  Easter  on  a  day  not  appointed  by  the  Catholic 
Church.23 

That  these  laws  might  not  be  vain,  the  office  of  "in- 
quisitor of  the  faith,"  was  instituted,  and  it  was  not  long 
before  capital  punishment  was  inflicted  upon  "heresy," 
though  not  exactly  under  Theodosius  himself.  Gratian  was 
killed  in  A.  D.  383,  by  command  of  a  certain  Maximus,  who 
had  been  declared  emperor  by  the  troops  in  Britain,  and  ac- 
knowledged by  the  troops  in  Gaul.  A  treaty  of  peace  was 
formed  between  him  and  Theodosius,  and  the  new  emperor 
Maximus  stepped  into  the  place  both  in  Church  and  State, 
which  had  been  occupied  by  Gratian. 

A  certain  Priscillian  and  his  followers  were  condemned 
as  heretics  by  the  Council  of  Bordeaux  in  A.  D.  384.  They 
appealed  to  the  emperor  Maximus,  under  whose  civil  juris- 
diction they  were  ;  but  by  the  diligence  of  three  bishops  — 

23  Jd. 


THE   EMPIRE  IS   "CONVERTED."  401 

Ithacius,  Magnus,  and  Rufus —  as  prosecutors,  they  were 
there  likewise  condemned.  Priscillian  himself,  two  presby- 
ters, two  deacons,  Latronian  a  poet,  and  Euchrocia  the 
widow  of  an  orator  of  Bordeaux, —  seven  in  all, —  were  be- 
headed, while  others  were  banished. 

Tims  the  union  of  Church  and  State,  the  clothing  of  the 
church  with  civil  power,  bore  its  inevitable  fruit.  It  is  true 
that  there  were  some  bishops  who  condemned  the  execution 
of  the  Priscillianists,  but  the  others  fully  justified  it.  Those 
who  condemned  it,  however,  did  so  more  at  the  sight  of 
actual  bloodshed,  than  for  any  other  reason  ;  because  they 
fully  justified,  and  in  fact  demanded,  every  penalty  short  of 
actual  death.  And  those  who  persecuted  the  Priscillianists, 
and  who  advocated,  and  secured,  and  justified,  their  execu- 
tion, were  never  condemned  by  the  church  nor  by  any  coun- 
cil. In  fact  their  course  was  actually  indorsed  by  a  council ; 
for  "the  synod  at  Treves,  in  385,  sanctioned  the  conduct  of 
Ithacius"  (Ilefele*4),  who  was  the  chief  prosecutor  in  the 
case.  Even  the  disagreement  as  to  whether  it  was  right  or 
not,  was  silenced  when,  twenty  years  afterward,  Augustine 
set  forth  his  principles,  asserting  the  righteousness  of  what- 
ever penalty  would  bring  the  incorrigible  to  the  highest 
grade  of  religious  development ;  and  the  matter  was  fully 
set  at  rest  for  all  time  when,  in  A.  D.  -i-tt,  Leo,  bishop  of 
Rome,  justified  the  execution  of  Priscillian  and  his  associate 
heretics,  and  declared  the  righteousness  of  the  penalty  of 
death  for  heresy. 

In  re-establishing  the  unity  of  the  Catholic  faith,  Theodo- 
sius  did  not  confine  his  attention  to  professors  of  Christianity 
only.  In  his  original  edict,  it  will  be  remembered  that  all 
his  subjects  should  be  Catholic  Christians.  A  good  many  of 
his  subjects  were  pagans,  and  still  conformed  to  the  pagan 
ceremonies  and  worship.  In  382  Gratian,  at  the  instance  of 
Ambrose,  had  struck  a  blow  at  the  pagan  religion  by  reject- 
ing the  dignity  of  Pontifex  Maximus,  which  had  been  borne 
by  every  one  of  his  predecessors  ;  and  had  also  commanded 

24  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  104, 
32 


402          THE   CATHOLIC'  FAITH  RE-ESTABLISHED. 

that  the  statue  and  altar  of  Victory  should  be  thrown  down. 
Maxirnus  was  killed  in  388,  and  on  account  of  the  youth  o'f 
Valentinian  II,  Theodosius,  as  his  guardian,  became  virtually 
ruler  of  the  whole  empire  ;  and  at  Rome  the  same  year,  he 
assembled  the  Senate  and  put  to  them  the  question  whether 
the  old  or  the  new  religion  should  be  that  of  the  empire. 

By  the  imperial  influence,  the  majority  of  the  Senate,  as 
in  the  church  councils,  adopted  the  will  of  the  emperor,  and 
"the  same  laws  which  had  been  originally  published  in  the 
provinces  of  the  East,  were  applied,  after  the  defeat  of 
Maximus,  to  the  whole  extent  of  the  Western  empire.  .  .  . 
A  special  commission  was  granted  to  Cynegius,  the  praeto- 
rian prefect  of  the  East,  and  afterwards  to  the  counts  Jovius 
and  Gaudentius,  two  officers  of  distinguished  rank  in  the 
West,  by  which  they  were  directed  to  shut  the  temples,  to 
seize  or  destroy  the  instruments  of  idolatry,  to  abolish  the 
privileges  of  the  priests,  and  to  confiscate  the  consecrated 
property  for  the  benefit  of  the  emperor,  of  the  church,  or  of 
the  army."--  Gibbon.™ 

Thus  was  the  Catholic  faith  finally  established  as  that  of 
the  Roman  empire,  thus  was  that  empire  "converted,"  and 
thus  was  Pagan  Rome  made  Papal  Rome. 

25  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxviii,  par.  5. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


MARY  IS  MADE  THE  MOTHER  OF  GOD. 

BY  the  pious  zeal  of  Theodosius,  "the  unity  of  the  faith" 
had  been  once  more  secured,  and  the  empire  had  been 
made  Catholic.  As  all  his  efforts  in  this  direction  had  been 
put  forth  to  secure  the  peace  of  the  church,  it  might  be  sup- 
posed that  this  result  should  have  been  assured.  But  peace 
was  just  as  far  from  the  church  now  as  it  ever  had  been, 
and  a  good  deal  farther  from  the  State  than  it  had  ever  yet 
been. 

By  this  time,  among  the  chief  bishoprics  of  the  empire, 
the  desire  for  supremacy  had  become  so  all-absorbing  that 
each  one  was  exerting  every  possible  influence  to  bring  the 
others  into  subjection  to  himself.  The  rivalry,  however, 
was  most  bitter  between  the  bishopric  of  Alexandria  and 
that  of  Constantinople.  Of  the  great  sees  of  the  empire, 
Alexandria  had  always  held  the  second  place.  Now,  how- 
ever, Constantinople  was  the  chief  imperial  city  ;  and,  as 
already  related,  the  Council  of  Constantinople  had  ordained 
that  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  should  hold  the  first  rank 
after  the  bishop  of  Rome.  The  Alexandrian  party  argued 
that  this  dignity  was  merely  honorary,  and  carried  with  it 
no  jurisdiction.  Home,  seeing  to  what  the  canon  might 
lead,  sided  with  Alexandria.  Constantinople,  however, 
steadily  insisted  that  the  canon  bestowed  jurisdiction  to  the 
full  extent  of  the  honor.  The  bishop  of  Constantinople 
therefore  aspired  to  the  complete  occupancy  of  the  second 
place,  and  Alexandria  was  supremely  jealous  of  the  aspira- 

[403] 


404:     MARY  IS  MADE  THE  NOT  HER  OF  GOD. 

tion.  It  will  be  remembered  that  when  Gregory  Nazianzen 
was  first  called  to  the  bishopric  of  Constantinople,  Peter  of 
Alexandria  had  caused  Maximus  to  be  ordained,  and  now 
this  same  spirit  showed  itself  again  and  much  more  violently 
than  before. 

Theodosius  died  A.  D.  395,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  two 
sons,  Arcadius  and  Honorius,  by  whom  the  empire  was  per- 
manently divided.  Arcadius  became  emperor  of  the  East 
and  Honorius  of  the  West.  Although  Arcadius  occupied 
the  throne  and  bore  the  name  of  "emperor,"  "  the  East 
was  now  governed  by  women  and  eunuchs."  —  M/lman.1 
Eutropius,  the  eunuch,  was  prime  minister  to  Arcadius.  At 
the  death  of  Nectarius,  Eutropius  had  brought  from  Antioch 
and  made  bishop  of  Constantinople,  a  presbyter,  John  sur- 
named  Chrysostom  —  the  golden-mouthed.  By  the  exercise 
of  discipline,  Chrysostom  undertook  to  purify  the  bishopric. 
He  "exposed  with  unsparing  indignation  the  vices  and 
venality  of  the  clergy,  and  involved  them  all  in  one  indis- 
criminate charge  of  simony  and  licentiousness."  —  Milrnan.9 
In  an  episcopal  progress  through  Lydia  and  Phrygia,  he 
deposed  thirteen  bishops.  He  declared  his  free  opinion 
"  that  the  number  of  bishops  who  might  be  saved,  bore  a 
very  small  proportion  to  those  who  would  be  damned." 
Giljbon?  In  addition  to  this,  and  with  much  more  danger 
to  himself,  he  incurred  the  enmity  of  the  monks,  who  now 
existed  in  swarms  throughout  the  East,  by  declaring  with 
evident  truth  that  they  were  ' '  the  disgrace  of  their  holy  pro- 
fession." 

These  measures  set  the  whole  ecclesiastical  order  against 
him,  and  they  began  to  intrigue  for  his  overthrow.  This 
opened  the  way  for  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  again  to  assert 
his  authority. 

Theophilus,  a  violent  and  unscrupulous  prelate,  was  now 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  he  immediately  espoused  .the 

1 "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ix,  par.  3(5. 

2  Id.,  par.  45,  3  "Decline  and  Fall,''  chap,  xxvii.  par.  9,  note. 


CHRYH08TOM  DEPOSED   AND   BANTfWKn.  405 

cause  of  the  malcontents,  who  proudly  accepted  him  as  their 
leader.  Another  new  element  was  now  added  :  Chrysostom 
had  not  confined  his  denunciations  to  the  clergy  and  the 
monks,  but  had  uttered  them  against  the  women  of  the 
court,  and  especially  the  empress  Eudoxia,  a  young  and 
beautiful  woman  of  violent  disposition,  "who  indulged  her 
passions,  and  despised  her  husband." — Gibbon*  Her, 
Chrysostom  reviled  as  another  Jezebel.  She  was  not  the 
kind  of  woman  who  would  take  this  without  making  reply. 
She  called  TKeopliilus  to  Constantinople  to  preside  over  a 
council  to  depose  Chrysostom.  He  came  with  a  "stout 
body  of  Egyptian  mariners  "  to  protect  him,  and  a  train  of 
bishops  to  sit  in  the  council. 

Theophilus  and  his  followers  joined  with  the  enemies  of 
Chrysostom,  numbering  thirty-six  bishops  in  all,  and  held 
their  council  at  a  place  or  estate  Ad  Qiiercem  —  at  the  Oak. 
Four  times  the  council  summoned  Chrysostom  to  appear, 
and  sent  the  following  letter  :  — 

"The  holy  synod  at  the  Oak  to  John:  Letters  complaining  of 
countless  offenses  committed  by  you  have  been  delivered  to  us.  Ap- 
pear, therefore,  and  bring  with  you  the  priests  Serapion  and  Tigrius,  for 
they  are  wanted."5 

Chrysostom  on  his  part  assembled  a  council  of  forty 
bishops,  and  sent  three  of  the  bishops  and  two  priests  with 
a  letter  to  Theophilus,  telling  him  that  he  should  not  disturb 
the  church,  and  that  if  in  spite  of  the  Nicene  Canon,  he 
wranted  to  settle  a  dispute  beyond  his  diocese,  he  should 
come  to  Constantinople  itself,  and  "not  like  Cain  entice 
Abel  into  the  field."  In  the  letter  he  also  declared  that  as 
there  was  an  indictment  against  Theophilus  containing  sev- 
enty charges,  he  was  the  one  who  ought  really  to  be  called 
to  account  rather  than  to  be  presiding  in  a  council  to  try 
another  ;  and  besides  this  that  there  were  more  bishops  in 
the  council  at  Constantinople  than  there  were  with  Theophilus 

4  fd.,  par.  13. 

5Hefele,  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  115,  par.  4, 


406  MART  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF  GOD. 

at  the  Oak.  At  the  same  time  he  wrote  privately  to  other 
bishops  at  the  Oak  telling  them  that  if  they  would  exclude 
from  the  council  his  avowed  enemies,  he  would  appear 
whenever  they  desired  ;  but  if  not,  he  would  not  appear, 
even  if  they  sent  ten  thousand  times  for  him.  In  answer  to 
this  letter,  a  notary  was  sent  to  Chrysostom  with  an  imperial 
decree  that  he  "must  appear  at  the  synod,"  and  at  the 
same  time  a  priest  and  a  monk  brought  a  fresh  summons 
from  the  synod  at  the  Oak.  Chrysostom  then  sent  author- 
ized representatives  to  the  Oak.  "They  were  roughly 
treated,  and  the  process  against  him  was  put  into  full 
swing.  "-  —  Ilefele. 6 

The  council  sat  for  two  weeks,  during  which  time  they 
framed  twenty-nine  different  charges,  amongst  which  those 
considered  the  very  gravest  were  that  he  had  "  administered 
baptism  after  he  had  eaten,"  and  another,  that  he  had  "  ad- 
ministered the  sacrament  to  those  who  had  in  like  manner 
broken  their  fast."  - Milman.'1  He  was  unanimously  con- 
demned, and  as  there  had  been  accessions  to  their  number, 
there  were  forty-five  bishops  who  subscribed  to  the  decree. 

Having  deposed  him,  it  was  necessary  to  execute  the 
sentence,  but  on  account  of  the  watchfulness  of  the  popu- 
lace, this  had  to  be  done  at  night.  To  prevent  a  riot,  he 
secretly  surrendered  himself  to  the  imperial  officers,  who 
conducted  him  across  the  Bosphorus  and  landed  him  at  a 
place  near  the  entrance  of  the  Black  Sea.  Theophilus  and 
his  followers  had  come  into  the  city,  and  the  next  day  when 
the  populace  learned  that  Chrysostom  had  been  carried  off, 
"they  suddenly  rose  with  unanimous  and  irresistible  fury. 
Theophilus  escaped  ;  but  the  promiscuous  crowd  of  monks 
and  Egyptian  mariners  were  slaughtered  without  pity  in  the 
streets  of  Constantinople."  -  Gibbon* 

6  Id.,  par.  6. 

7  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ix,  par.  46,  note. 

8  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxii,  par.  11. 


&HRYSOSTOM  RECALLED  AND  AGAIN  BANISHED.      407 

The  next  night  there  was  a  harmless  earthquake,  but  it 
was  readily  seized  upon  and  made  to  do  service  as  evidence 
of  the  wrath  of  Heaven  against  the  deposition  of  Chrysos- 
tom.  Eudoxia  herself,  as  superstitious  as  the  rest,  was 
frightened  by  it,  and  when  the  mob  crowded  about  the 
palace  asserting  the  vengeance  of  Heaven  and  demanding 
the  return  of  Chrysostom,  she  went  herself  to  Arcadius, 
asked  for  his  recall,  and,  to  appease  the  populace,  published 
a  letter  "disclaiming  all  hostility  to  the  banished  prelate, 
and  protesting  that  she  was  'innocent  of  his  blood.'"  — 
Milman* 

Chrysostom  returned  in  triumph.  The  whole  city,  men, 
women,  and  children,  turned  out  to  meet  him.  The  shores 
were  crowded  ;  the  Bosphorus  was  covered  with  vessels,  and 
both  shores  were  grandly  illuminate^.  When  he  landed, 
with  hymns  of  thanksgiving  and  chants  of  praise  they  es- 
corted him  to  the  cathedral.  Chrysostom  mounted  the  pul- 
pit, and  made  the  following  speech  :  — 

"What  shall  I  say?  Blessed  be  God  !  These  were  my  last  words 
on  my  departure,  these  the  first  on  my  return.  Blessed  be  God  !  because 
he  permitted  the  storm  to  rage.  Blessed  be  God  !  because  he  has  allayed 
it.  Let  my  enemies  behold  how  their  conspiracy  has  advanced  my  peace, 
and  redounded  to  my  glory.  Before,  the  church  alone  was  crowded, 
now  the  whole  forum  is  become  a  church.  The  games  are  celebrating 
in  the  circus,  but  the  whole  people  pour  like  a  torrent  to  the  church. 
Your  prayers  in  my  behalf  are  more  glorious  than  a  diadem, —  the  prayers 
both  of  men  and  women  ;  for  in  Christ  there  is  neither  male  nor  female."10 

Thus  exultant  in  his  victorv  over  his  opponents,  he  broke 
out  more  violently  than  ever  in  denunciation  of  the  empress. 
The  statue  of  Eudoxia  was  about  to  be  set  up  in  front  of  the 
cathedral.  It  seems  that  this  was  to  be  performed  on  a  fes- 
tival day,  and  on  such  occasions  dances,  pantomimes,  and  all 
sorts  of  theatricals  were  indulged  in.  Chrysostom  uttered  a 
loud  protest  against  this  celebration,  as  his  zeal  "was  al- 

9  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  ill,  chap,  ix,  par.  50. 
10  Id.,  par.  51. 


408  MARY  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF   GOD. 

ways  especially  directed  against  these  idolatrous  amusements 
which  often,  he  confesses,  drained  the  church  of  his  hear- 
ers." —  Milman.11  His  denunciations  were  reported  to  the 
empress,  as  personal  insults  to  her.  She  threatened  to  call 
another  council,  and  have  him  deposed  again.  He  replied 
with  a  sermon  yet  bolder  than  all  before,  in  which  he  likened 
her  to  Herodias,  exclaiming  :  — 

"Again  Herodias  raves;  again  she  is  troubled;  she  dances  again; 
and  again  desires  to  receive  John's  head  in  a  charger."  12 

The  emperor  immediately  suspended  him,  and  a  council 
was  appointed,  which,  under  the  guidance  of  Theophilus, 
again  condemned  him.  but  upon  the  charges  that  he  had 
resisted  the  decrees  of  the  former  synod,  and  that  he  had 
violated  the  canons  of  the  church  in  resuming  and  exercising 
the  office  of  bishop,'  while  yet  under  condemnation  of  a 
council.  The  sentence  of  exile  was  again  pronounced,  and 
a  detachment  of  barbarian  troops  was  brought  into  the  city 
to  assist  the  imperial  officers  in  executing  the  sentence. 
"In  the  midst  of  the  solemn  celebration  of  Good  Friday, 
in  the  great  church  of  Santa  Sophia,  the  military  forced  their 
way,  not  merely  into  the  nave,  but  up  to  the  altar,  on  which 
were  placed  the  consecrated  elements.  Many  worshipers 
were  trodden  under  foot  ;  many  wounded  by  the  swords  of 
the  soldiers  :  the  clergy  were  dragged  to  prison  ;  some 
females,  who  were  about  to  lae  baptized,  were  obliged  to  fly 
with  their  disordered  apparel  :  the  waters  of  the  font  were 
stained  with  blood  ;  the  soldiers  pressed  up  to  the  altar  ; 
seized  the  sacred  vessels  as  their  plunder  ;  the  sacred  ele- 
ments were  scattered  about  !  .  .  .  Constantinople  for  several 
days  had  the  appearance  of  a  city  which  had  been  stormed. 
Wherever  the  partisans  of  Chrysostom  were  assembled, 
they  were  assaulted  and  dispersed  by  the  soldiery  :  females 
were  exposed  to  insult,  and  one  frantic  attempt  was  made  to 
assassinate  the  prelate."  — 


11  Id.,  par.  54. 

12Socrates's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vi,  chap,  xviii. 

13  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ix,  par  56. 


A    GENERAL   COUNCIL  DEMANDED. 

Chrysostom  was  concealed  by  his  friends,  but  after 
awhile  lie  escaped  from  them,  and  gave  himself  up  again. 
Again  he  was  taken  from  the  city  by  night  ;  and  now  he 
was  banished  —  A.  n.  404 — to  a  town  called  Caucasus  in 
the  mountains  of  Armenia.  And  "  on  the  very  day  of  his 
departure,  some  of  John's  friends  set  fire  to  the  church,  which 
by  means  of  a  strong  easterly  wind,  communicated  with  the 
Senate-house. "-  —  Socrates. li 

As  soon  as  Chrysostom  had  been  permanently  sent  away, 
Theophilus  sent  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  the  information  that 
he  had  deposed  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  but  without 
telling  him  why.  Chrysostom  also  from  his  place  of  exile 
addressed  the  bishop  of  Rome,  giving  an  account  of  the  pro- 
ceedings against  him,  and  asking  Innocent  "to  declare  such 
wicked  proceedings  void  and  null,  to  pronounce  all  who  had 
any  share  in  them,  punishable  according  to  the  ecclesiastical 
laws,  and  to  continue  to  him  the  marks  of  his  charity  and 
communion."  —  Rower. r* 

As  was  to  be  expected,  Chrysostom  also  asked  the  bishop 
of  Rome  to  use  his  influence  to  have  a  general  council  called 
to  settle  the  matter.  Letters  were  also  sent  from  the  clergy 

o«/ 

of  Constantinople  and  the  bishops  who  sided  wTith  Chrysos- 
tom, asking  Innocent  to  take  an  interest  in  the  case.  Inno- 
cent answered  both  with  the  statement  that  he  admitted  the 
bishops  of  both  parties  to  his  communion,  and  thus  left  no 
room  for  complaints  on  either  side  ;  and  that  the  council 
which  was  contemplated  might  not  be  biased  beforehand. 
Innocent  applied  to  the  Emperor  Honorius,  asking  him  to 
persuade  Arcadius  to  agree  to  the  calling  of  a  general  coun- 
cil, to  settle  the  dispute  and  contention  between  Chrysostom 
and  Theophilus.  Honorius  wrote  three  letters  to  Arcadius, 
the  last  of  which  was  as  follows  :  — 

"This  is  the  third  time  I  write  to  your  Meekness  entreating  you  to 
correct  and  rectify  the  iniquitous  proceedings  that  have  been  carried  on 

against  John,  bishop  of  Constantinople.     But  nothing,  I  find,  has  been 

> 
11 "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vi,  chap,  xviii. 

15 "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Innocent  T,  par.  8. 


410     MAKf  IS  MADE  THE  MOTHER  OF  GOD. 

hitherto  done  in  his  behalf.  Having  therefore  much  at  heart  the  peace 
of  the  church,  which  will  be  attended  with  that  of  our  empire,  I  write 
to  you  anew  by  these  holy  bishops  and  presbyters,  earnestly  desiring 
you  to  command  the  Eastern  bishops  to  assemble  at  Thessalonica.  The 
Western  bishops  have  sent  five  of  their  body,  two  presbyters  of  the 
Roman  Church,  and  one  deacon,  all  men  of  strictest  equity,  and  quite 
free  from  the  bias  of  favor  and  hatred.  These  I  beg  you  would  receive 
with  that  regard  which  is  due  to  their  rank  and  merit.  If  they  find 
John  to  have  been  justly  deposed,  they  may  separate  me  from  his  com- 
munion ;  and  you  from  the  communion  of  the  orientals,  if  it  appears 
that  he  has  been  unjustly  deposed.  The  Western  bishops  have  very 
plainly  expressed  their  sentiments,  in  the  many  letters  they  have  written 
to  me  on  the  subject  of  the  present  dispute.  Of  these  I  send  you  two, 
the  one  from  the  bishop  of  Rome,  the  other  from  the  bishop  of  Aquileia ; 
and  with  them  the  rest  agree.  One  thing  I  must  above  all  beg  of  your 
Meekness  ;  that  you  oblige  Theophilus  of  Alexandria  to  assist  at  the 
council,  how  averse  soever  he  may  be  to  it ;  for  he  is  said  to  be  the  first 
and  chief  author  of  the  present  calamities.  Thus  the  synod,  meeting 
with  no  delays  or  obstructions,  will  restore  peace  and  tranquillity  in  our 
days."16 

Not  only  were  the  letters  of  Honorius  disregarded,  but 
his  ambassadors  were  insulted  and  abused  ;  which  when  he 
learned,  he  was  about  to  declare  war,  but  was  prevented  by 
an  invasion  of  the  barbarians. 

Thus  the  efforts  to  obtain  a  general  council  upon  this 
question  came  to  naught.  When  Innocent  learned  this,  he 
determined  to  take  the  side  of  Chrysostom.  He  therefore 
published  a  letter  announcing  the  fact,  and  separating  from 
his  communion  Theophilus  and  all  who  were  of  his  party. 
Chrysostom  died  in  407 ;  but  the  quarrel  was  continued  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome,  who  refused  to  communicate  with  the 
new  bishop  of  Constantinople,  unless  he  would  acknowledge 
that  Chrysostom  was  lawful  bishop  of  that  city  until  the  day 
of  his  death.  As  this  would  be  to  acknowledge  that  his  own 
election  to  the  bishopric  of  Constantinople  was  unlawful, 
Atticus  refused  ;  and  the  contention  was  kept  up  seven  years 
longer,  but  was  finally  compromised  in  414. 

The  empress  Eudoxia  died  about  A.  D.  405.  The  em- 
peror Arcadius  died  May  1,  A.  D.  408,  leaving  a  son  — 

16  Bower,  Id.,  par.  14. 


GYRIL   OF  ALEXANDRIA.  411 

Theodosius  II  —  seven  years  of  age,  heir  to  the  throne,  and  a 
daughter,  Pulcheria,  ten  years  of  age,  who,  after  A.  D.  414, 
held  the  most  important  place  in  the  affairs  of  the  empire 
for  forty  years.  At  the  age  of  twenty  and  by  the  arts  of 
Pulcheria,  Theodosius  II  was  married  to  Eudocia,  wljo  was 
nearly  eight  years  older  than  himself,  and  the  incapable 
youth  was  kept  in  a  "perpetual  infancy,  encompassed  only 
with  a  servile  train  of  women  and  eunuchs,"  and  ruled  by 
women,  eunuchs,  and  monks. 

The  war  with  Chrysostom  was  ended,  yet  the  roots  of 
bitterness  and  seeds  of  strife  still  remained  between  Alexan- 
dria and  Constantinople.  And  though  -the  two  men  who 
were  bishops  of  these  two  cities  were  in  harmony  so  far  as 
the  confusion  about  Chrysostom  was  c6ncerned,  the  same 
jealousy  as  to  the  dignity  of  their  respective  sees  still  existed, 
and  soon  broke  out  more  violently  than  ever  before.  The 
subject  of  the  next  dispute  was  a  question  of  doctrine,  and, 
like  that  over  the  Homoousion,  was  so  illusive,  and  the  dis- 
putants believed  so  nearly  alike  and  yet  were  so  determined 
not  to  believe  alike,  and  the  men  who  led  in  it  were  so  ar- 
rogant and  cruel,  that  from  the  beginning  the  contention  was 
more  violent  than  any  that  had  yet  been. 

In  A.  D.  412,  Cyril,  the  nephew  of  Theophilus,  became 
bishop  of  Alexandria.  He  was  one  of  the  very  worst  men 
of  his  time.  He  began  his  episcopacy  by  shutting  up  the 
churches  of  the  Novatians,  "the  most  innocent  and  harm- 
less of  the  sectaries,"  and  taking  possession  of  all  their 
ecclesiastical  ornaments  and  consecrated  vessels,  and  strip- 
ping their  bishop,  Theopernptus,  of  all  his  possessions.  Nor 
was  Cyril  content  with  the  exercise  of  such  strictly  episcopal 
functions  as  these  :  he  aspired  to  absolute  authority,  civil  as 
well  as  ecclesiastical. 

He  drove  out  the  Jews,  forty  thousand  in  number,  de- 
stroyed their  synagogues,  and  allowed  his  followers  to  strip 
them  of  all  their  possessions.  Orestes,  the  prefect  of  Egypt, 
displeased  at  the  loss  of  such  a  large  number  of  wealthy  and 


412  MART  TS  MADE    THE   MOTHER    OF   GOD. 

industrious  people,  entered  a  protest,  and  sent  up  a  report 
to  the  emperor.  Cyril  likewise  wrote  to  the  emperor.  No 
answer  came  from  the  court,  and  the  people  urged  Cyril  to 
come  to  a  reconciliation  with  the  prefect,  but  his  advances 
were  made  in  such  a  way  that  the  prefect  would  not  receive 
them.  The  monks  poured  in  from  the  desert  to  the  number 
of  about  five  hundred,  to  champion  the  cause  of  Cyril. 

Orestes  \vas  passing  through  the  streets  in  his  chariot. 
The  monks  flocked  around  him,  insulted  him,  and  denounced 
him  as  a  heathen  and  an  idolater.  Orestes,  thinking  that 
perhaps  they  thought  this  was  so,  and  knowing  his  life  to  be 
in  danger,  called  ont  that  he  was  a  Christian,  and  had  been 
baptized  by  Atticus,  bishop  of  Constantinople.  His  defense 
was  in  vain.  In  answer,  one  of  the  monks  threw  a  big  stone 
which  struck  him  on  the  head,  and  wounded  him  so  that  his 
face  was  covered  with  blood.  At  this  all  his  guards  fled  for 
their  lives  ;  but  the  populace  came  to  the  rescue,  and  drove 
off  the  monks,  and  captured  the  one  who  threw  the  stone. 
His  name  was  Ammonius,  and  the  prefect  punished  him  so 
severely  that  shortly  afterward  ho  died.  "Cyril  commanded 
his  body  to  be  taken  up  ;  the  honors  of  a  Christian  martyr 
were  prostituted  on  this  insolent  ruffian,  his  panegyric  was 
pronounced  in  the  church,  and  he  was  named  Thaumasius  — 
the  wonderful."  —Milman.11 

But  the  party  of  Cyril  proceeded  to  yet  greater  violence 
than  this.  At  that  time  there  was  in  Alexandria  a  teacher 
of  philosophy,  a  woman,  Hypatia  by  name.  She  gave  pub- 
lic lectures  which  were  so  largely  attended  by  the  chief 
people  of  the  city,  that  Cyril  grew  jealous  that  more  people 
went  to  hear  her  lecture  than  came  to  hear  him  preach. 
She  was  a  friend  of  Orestes,  and  it  was  also  charged  that 
she,  more  than  any  other,  was  the  cause  why  Orestes  would 
not  be  reconciled  to  Cyril.  One  day  as  Hypatia  was  passing 
through  the  street  in  a  chariot,  she  was  attacked  by  a  crowd 
of  Cyril's  partisans,  whose  ring-leader  was  Peter  the  Reader. 

17  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  23. 


NESTORIU8   OF    CONSTANTINOPLE.  413 

She  was  torn  from  her  chariot,  stripped  naked  in  the  street, 
dragged  into  a  church,  and  there  beaten  to  death  with  a  club, 
by  Peter  the  Header.  Then  they  tore  her  limb  from  limb, 
and  with  shells  scraped  the  flesh  from  her  bones,  and  threw 
the  remnants  into  the  fire,  March,  A.  D.  414. 

This  was  Cyril, —  now  Saint  Cyril, —  bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria. And  in  addition  to  his  naturally  tyrannical  and  mur- 
derous disposition,  ''jealousy  and  animosity  toward  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople  was  a  sacred  legacy  bequeathed 
by  Theophilus  to  -his  nephew,  and  Cyril  faithfully  admin- 
istered the  fatal  trust." •  —  JH-ilnian.18 

In  428,  there  was  appointed  to  the  bishopric  of  Constan- 
tinople a  monk  of  Antioch,  Nestorius  by  name,  who  in 
wickedness  of  disposition  was  only  second  to  Cyril  of  Alex- 
andria. In  his  ordination  sermon  before  the  great  crowd 
of  people,  he  personally  addressed  to  the  emperor  these 
words :  — 

"  Give  me,  my  prince,  the  earth  purged  of  heretics,  and  I  will  give 
you  heaven  as  a  recompense.  Assist  me  in  destroying  heretics,  and  I 
will  assist  you  in  vanquishing  the  Persians."10 

The  fifth  day  afterward,  in  accordance  with  this  proposi- 
tion, JSTestorius  began  his  part  in  purging  the  earth  of 
heretics.  There  was  a  little  company  of  Arians  who  met  in 
a  private  house  for  worship  ;  these  were  surprised  and  at- 
tacked, and  as  they  saw  the  house  being  torn  to  pieces 
and  sacked,  they  set  fire  to  it,  which  burned  that  building 
and  many  others  adjoining.  On  account  of  this,  Nestorius 
received  from  both  parties  the  appropriate  nickname  of  the 
"Incendiary.""  This  attack  upon  the  Arians  was  followed 
furiously  upon  the  Quarto-Decimans,  who  celebrated  Easter 
on  a  day  other  than  the  Catholic  Sunday  ;  and  also  upon  the 
Novatians.  The  authority  of  the  emperor  somewhat  checked 
his  fury  against  the  Novatians,  but  it  raged  unmolested 
against  the  Quarto-Decimans  throughout  Asia,  Lydia,  and 

™Id.,  par.  21. 

19  Socrates's  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vii,  chap.  xxix. 


414  MARY  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF   GOD. 

Caria,  and  multitudes  perished  in  the  tumults  which  he 
stirred  up,  especially  at  Miletus  and  Sardis. 

And  now  these  two  desperate  men,  Nestorius  and  Cyril, 
became  the  respective  champions  of  the  two  sides  of  a  con- 
troversy touching  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  Church,  as  to 
whether  Mary  was  the  Mother  of  God  or  not.  In  the  long 
contention  and  the  fine-spun  distinctions  as  to  whether  the 
Son  of  God  is  of  the  same  substance,  or  only  of  like  sub- 
stance with  the  Father,  Christ  had  been  removed  entirely 
beyond  the  comprehension  of  the  people.  And  owing  to 
the  desperate  character  and  cruel  disposition  of  the  men  who 
carried  on  the  controversy  as  the  representatives  of  Christ, 
the  members  of  the  church  were  made  afraid  of  him.  And 
now,  instead  of  Jesus  standing  forth  as  the  mediator  between 
men  and  God,  he  was  removed^so  far  away  and  was  clothed 
with  such  a  forbidding  aspect,  that  it  became  necessary  to 
have  a  mediator  between  men  and  Christ.  And  into  this 
place  the  Virgin  Mary  was  put. 

This  gave  rise  to  the  question  as  to  what  was  the  exact 
relationship  of  Mary  to  Christ.  Was  she  actually  the  mother 
of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  therefore  the  Mother  of  God  ? 
or  was  she  only  the  mother  of  the  humanity  of-  Christ  ?  For 
a  considerable  time  already  the  question  had  been  agitated, 
and  among  a  people  whose  ancestors  for  ages  had  been 
devout  worshipers  of  the  mother  goddesses  —  Diana  and 
Cybele  —  the  title  "Mother  of  God  "  was  gladly  welcomed 
and  strenuously  maintained.  This  party  spoke  of  Mary  as 
"God-bearer;"  the  opposite  party  called  her  only  "man- 
bearer  ; "  while  a  third  party  coming  between  tried  to  have 
all  speak  of  her  as  "  Christ-bearer." 

As  before  stated,  this  question  had  already  been  agitated 
considerably,  but  when  two  such  characters  as  Cyril  and 
Nestorius  took  it  up,  it  speedily  became  the  one  all-impor- 
tant question,  and  the  all-absorbing  topic.  Nestorius  started 
it  in  his  very  first  sermon  after  becoming  bishop  of  Constan- 
tinople. He  denied  that  Mary  could  properly  be  called  the 


CTRIL  AND  NESTORIUS  AT   WAR.  415 

Mother  of  God.  Some  of  his  priests  immediately  withdrew 
from  his  communion,  and  began  to  preach  against  his  heresy, 
and  the  monks  rushed  in  also.  Nestorius  denounced  them 
all  as  miserable  men,  called  in  the  police,  and  had  some  of 
them  flogged  and  imprisoned,  especially  several  monks  who 
had  accused  him  to  the  emperor.  From  this  the  controversy 
spread  rapidly,  and  Cyril,  urged  on  by  both  natural  and 
inherited  jealousy,  carue  to  the  rescue  in  defense  of  the  title, 
"Mother  of  God."  "Cyril  of  Alexandria,  to  those  who 
esteem  the  stern  and  uncompromising  assertion  of  certain 
Christian  tenets  the  one  paramount  Christian  virtue,  may  be 
the  hero,  even  the  saint :  but  while  ambition,  intrigue,  arro- 
gance, rapacity,  and  violence  are  proscribed  as  unchristian 
means  —  barbarity,  persecution,  bloodshed  as  unholy  and 
unevangelical  wickedness  —  posterity  will  condemn'the  ortho- 
dox Cyril  as  one  of  the  worst  of  heretics  against  the  spirit  of 
the  gospel." — Milman.20 

It  is  not  necessary  to  put  into  this  book  the  blasphemous 
arguments  of  either  side.  It  is  enough  to  say  that  in  this 
controversy,  as  in  that  regarding  the  Homoomion,  the  whole 
dispute  was  one  about  words  and  terms  only.  Each  deter- 
mined that  the  other  should  express  the  disputed  doctrine  in 
his  own  words  and  ideas,  while  he  himself  could  not  clearly 
express  his~ideas  in  words  different  from  the  others.  "Never 
was  there  a  case  in  which  the  contending  parties  approxi- 
mated so  closely.  Both  subscribed,  both  appealed,  to  the 
Nicene  Creed  ;  both  admitted  the  pre-existence,  the  impassi- 
bility, of  the  Eternal  Word  ;  but  the  fatal  duty  ...  of  con- 
sidering the  detection  of  heresy  the  first  of  religious  obliga- 
tions, mingled,  as  it  now  was,  with  human  passions  and  in- 
terests, made  the  breach  irreparable." — Milman.21 

Cyril  demanded  of  Nestorius  that  he  should  confess 
Mary  to  be  the  Mother  of  God,  without  any  distinction, 
explanation,  or  qualification.  And  because  Nestorius  would 

20 "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  20. 
par.  15, 


416  If  ART  IS  MADE    THE  MOTHER    OF   GOD. 

not  comply,  Cyril  denounced  him  everywhere  as  a  heretic, 
stirred  up  the  people  of  Constantinople  against  him,  and 
sent  letters  to  the  emperor,  the  empress,  and  to  Pulcheria, 
to  prove  to  them  that  the  Virgin  Mary  "ought  to  be  called  " 
the  Mother  of  God.  He  declared  that  to  dispute  such  a 
title  was  rank  heresy,  and  by  adulation,  and  by  declaring 
that  whoever  disputed  this  title  was  unworthy  of  the  protec- 
tion of  the  imperial  family,  he  sought  to  have  the  court  take 
his  side  at  once  against  Nestorius.  But  Nestorius  had  the 
advantage  with  respect  to  the  court,  because  he  was  present 
in  Constantinople. 

Fierce  letters  also  passed  between  Cyril  and  uSTestorius, 
and  both  sent  off  letters  to  Celestine,  bishop  of  Rome. 
Nestorius  sent  his  first,  but  he  wrote  in  Greek,  and  Celestine 
had  to  send  it  to  Gaul  to  be  translated  into  Latin,  so  that  he 
could  read  it.  Before  the  letter  of  Kestorius  was  returned 
from  Gaul,  Cyril's  letter  had  arrived,  which  was  written  in 
Latin  ;  with  which  also  he  had  sent  some  of  the  sermons  of 
Nestorius  which  he  had  translated  into  Latin  for  the  benefit 
of  Celestine.  Yet  further  he  gave  citations  to  Athanasius 
and  Peter  of  Alexandria,  where  they  had  given  to  Mary  the 
title  of  Mother  of  God.  Celestine  called  a  council  in  Rome, 
A.  D.  430.  The  letters  and  papers  of  both  Cyril  and  Nesto- 
rius  were  read,  after  which  Celestine  made  a  long  speech  to 
prove  that  "  the  Virgin  Mary  was  truly  the  Mother  of  God." 
He  supported  his  view's  by  quotations  from  the  Eastern 
bishops,  whom  Cyril  had  cited,  and  also  from  his  predeces- 
sors Damasus  and  Hilary,  and  from  Ambrose  of  Milan  who 
had  caused  the  people  on  Christmas  day  every  year  to  sing 
a  hymn  in  honor  of  Mary,  in  which  she  was  called  the 
Mother  of  God. 

The  council  declared  that  Nestorius  was  "the  author  of 
a  new  and  very  dangerous  heresy,"  praised  Cyril  for  oppos- 
ing it.  declared  the  doctrine  of  Cyril  strictly  orthodox,  and 
condemned  to  deposition  all  ecclesiastics  who  should  refuse 


THE  BISHOP   OF  ROME  JOINS   CYRIL.  417 

to  adopt  it.  Celestine  conveyed  to  Nestorius  the  decision 
of  the  council,  and  in  the  name  of  the  council  and  in  his 
own  name,  commanded  him  publicly  and  in  a  written  apology, 
to  renounce  his  heretical  opinions  within  ten  days  after  the 
receipt  of  this  letter,  or  else  incur  the  penalty  of  excommu- 
nication. On  the  same  day  Celestine  also  wrote  a  letter  to 
Cyril,  appointing  him  as  his  agent  to  execute  the  decision 
of  the  council,  and  empowering  him  in  the  name,  and  with 
the  authority,  of  the  apostolic  see,  to  excommunicate  and 
depose  JSTestorius,  if  by  the  expiration  of  ten  days  he  had 
not  recanted.  Other  letters  were  also  sent  at  the  same 
time  to  the  clergy  and  laity  of  Constantinople  and  to  the 
principal  bishops  of  the  East,  exhorting  them  to  steadfast- 
ness in  the  faith,  and  declaring  that  whomsoever  Nestorius 
had  excommunicated  or  deposed  on  account  of  this  question, 
should  be  counted  as  in  communion  with  the  bishop  of 
Rome. 

All  these  letters  were  sent  to  Cyril,  who  upon  "receiving 
them,  called  a  council  of  the  Egyptian  bishops,  and  drew 
up  twelve  propositions  with  their  respective  curses,  which 
Nestorius  was  to  sign  if  he  would  obey  the  sentence  of  the 
council  at  Rome,  and  recant  his  opinions.  It  was  also 
required  that  Nestorius  should  not  only  acknowledge  the 
creed  of  Nice,  but  that  he  must  add  a  written  and  sworn 
declaration  that  he  did  so,  and  that  he  would  condemn  all 
his  previous  "pernicious  and  unholy  assertions,"  and  agree 
in  future  to  "believe  and  teach  the  same  as  Cyril,  and  as 
the  synod,  and  the  bishops  of  the  East  and  West." — 
Hefele.™ 

All  this  with  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Rome  was  sent 
by  four  bishops  to  Nestorius  at  Constantinople.  These 
bishops  to  make  as  great  a  display  of  their  authority  as  pos- 
sible, went  to  the  cathedral  on  Sunday,  at  the  time  of  public 
service,  and  delivered  the  documents  to  Nestorius,  while  he 
was  performing  the  principal  service  of  the  day.  In  answer 

22  "History  of  the  Church  Couucils,"  sec.  131,  par.  1. 
33 


418  MARY  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF  GOD. 

to  these  decrees  Nestorius,  in  a  sermon  preached  on  the  fol- 
lowing Sabbath,  declared  that  to  maintain  the  peace  and 
tranquillity  of  the  church,  "he  was  ready  to  grant  the  title 
of  '  Mother  of  God '  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  providing  nothing 
else  was  thereby  meant  but  that  the  man  born  of  her  was 
united  to  the  Divinity."  But  Cyril  insisted  that  he  should 
adopt  the  twelve  propositions  and  their  curses  which  the  Alex- 
andrian Synod'  had  sent.  As  a  final  reply  Nestorius  then 
drew  up  twelve  counter  propositions  with  their  respective 
curses,  to  which  he  demanded  that  Cyril  should  subscribe. 

It  was  now  the  middle  of  December,  430.  All  the  time 
that  these  contentions  had  been  going  on,  both  parties  had 
been  calling  for  a  general  council ;  and  as  early  as  Novem- 
ber 19,  the  emperors  Theodosius  II  and  Valentinian  III  had 
issued  letters  ordering  a  general  council  to  meet  at  Ephesus 
in  the  spring  of  431. 

Of  all  places  in  the  world,  Ephesus  was  the  very  one 
where  it  would  be  the  nearest  to  an  impossibility  to  obtain 
anything  like  a  fair  examination  of  the  question.  Like 
Diana  of  old,  the  Virgin  Mary  was  now  the  patroness  of 
Ephesus  ;  and  the  worse  than  heathen  Catholics  were  more 
fanatically  devoted  to  hei-than  even  the  heathen  Ephesians 
had  been  to  Diana.  But  a  fair  examination  of  the  question, 
or  in  fact  any  real  examination,  was  not  intended  by  Celes- 
tine  and  Cyril.  Their  only  intention  was  either  the  uncon- 
ditional surrender  or  the  condemnation  of  Nestorius.  Cyril 
was  appointed  by  Celestine  to  preside  at  the  council.  He 
addressed  Celestine,  asking  whether  Nestorius  should  be 
allowed  to  sit  as  a  member  of  the  council.  Celestine  told 
him  that  he  should  do  everything  to  restore  peace  to  the 
church  and  to  win  Nestorius  to  the  truth  :  but  that  if  Nesto- 
rius  was  quite  determined  against  this,  "then  he  must  reap 
what,  with  the  help  of  the  devil,  he  had  sown."  - Hefele™ 

Celestine  also  sent  a  letter  to  the  emperor  Theodosius  II, 
saying  that  he  could  not  personally  attend  the  council,  but 

23  Id.,  sec.  133. 


GENERAL   COUNCIL   OF  EPHESUS.  419 

that  he  would  take  part  by  commissioners.  He  desired  that 
the  emperor  "should  allow  no  innovations,  and  no  disturb- 
ance of  the  peace  of  the  church.  He  should  even  regard 
the  interests  of  the  faith  as  higher  than  those  of  the  State  ; 
and  the  peace  of  the  church  as  much  more  important  than 
th-e  peace  of  the  nations."  Celestine's  instructions  to  his 
commissioners  were  to  the  same  intent.  He  commanded 
them  to  "hold  strictly  by  Cyril,"  but  at  the  same  time  to  be 
sure  "to  preserve  the  dignity  of  the  apostolic  see."  They 
were  directed  to  attend  all  the  meetings  of  the  council,  yet 
to  take  no  part  in  any  of  the  discussions,  but  to  "give  judg- 
ments "  on  the  views  of  others.  And  finally,  the  letter 
which  Celestine  sent  by  these  legates  to  the  bishops  in 
council  exhorted  them  "to  preserve  the  true  faith,"  and 
closed  with  these  words  :  — 

"The  legates  are  to  be  present  at  the  transactions  of  the  synod,  and 
will  give  effect  to  that  which  the  pope  has  long  ago  decided  with  respect 
to  Nestorius  ;  for  he  does  not  doubt  that  the  assembled  bishops  will 
agree  with  this."554 

Neither  of  the  emperors  was  present  at  the  council,  but 
they  jointly  appointed  Count  Candidian,  captain  of  the  im- 
perial bodyguard,  as  the  "Protector  of  the  Council."  Nes- 
torius  came  with  sixteen  bishops,  accompanied  by  an  armed 
guard  composed  of  bathmen  of  Constantinople  and  a  horde 
of  peasants.  In  addition  to  this,  by  the  special  favor  of  the 
emperor,  an  officer,  Irenseus,  with  a  body  of  soldiers,  was 
appointed  to  protect  him.  Cyril  came  wjth  fifty  Egyptian 
bishops,  and  a  number  of  bathmen  and  "a  multitude  of 
women"  from  Alexandria,  and  such  sailors  in  his  fleet  as  he 
could  depend  upon.  Arrived  at  Ephesus,  he  was  joined  by 
Memnon,  bishop  of  that  city,  with  fifty-two  bishops,  and  a 
crowd  of  peasants  whom  he  had  drawn  into  the  city.  Juve- 
nalis,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  came  with  his  subordinate  bish- 
ops, we  know  not  the  number  ;  these  also  were  hostile  to 
Nestorius,  and  joined  Cyril  and  Memnon.  Others  camo 

par.  3. 


420     MARY  JS  MADE  THE  MOTHER  OF  GOD. 

from  Thessalonica,  Apamea,  and  Hieropolis,  and  when  the 
council  opened,  there  were  one  hundred  and  ninety-eight 
bishops  present,  including  the  pope's  legates,  and  not 
including  Nestorius.  John  of  Antioch,  with  the  bishops  of 
his  diocese,  was  on  the  way,  but  did  not  reach  Ephesus  until 
Cyril's  part  of  the  council  was  over. 

The  council  was  to  have  met  June  7,  431,  but  owing  to 
delays  on  the  part  of  the  bishops  of  Jerusalem,  Thessalo- 
nica, and  Antioch,  it  did  not  open  until  June  22,  and  even 
then  the  bishops  of  Antioch  had  not  arrived.  But  all  the 
time  was  spent  in  preliminary  disputes,  winning  partisans,. 
and  working  up  the  populace.  As  Cyril  had  the  great 
majority  of  the  bishops  on  his  side,  and  as  the  city  was 
already  devoted  to  the  "  Mother  of  God,""  Nestorius  was  at 
a  great  disadvantage,  and  his  enemies  did  not  hesitate  to  let 
him  know  it,  and  to  make  him  feel  it.  Cyril  preached  a 
sermon  in  which  he  paid  the  following  idolatrous  tribute  to 
Mary  : — 

"  Blessed  be  thou,  O  Mother  of  God  !  Thou  rich  treasure  of  the 
world,  inextinguishable  lamp,  crown  of  virginity,  scepter  of  true  doc- 
trine, imperishable  temple,  habitation  of  Him  whom  no  space  can 
contain,  mother  and  virgin,  through  whom  He  is,  who  comes  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord.  Blessed  be  thou,  O  Mary,  who  didst  hold  in  thy 
womb  the  Infinite  One  ;  thou  through  whom  the  blessed  Trinity  is 
glorified  and  worshiped,  through  whom  the  precious  cross  is  adored 
throughout  the  world,  through  whom  heaven  rejoices  and  angels  and 
archangels  are  glad,  through  whom  the  devil  is  disarmed  and  banished, 
through  whom  the  fallen  creature  is  restored  to"  heaven,  through  whom 
every  believing  soul  is  saved."25 

Cyril  and  his  party  urged  that  the  council  should  be 
opened  without  any  more  delay.  As  the  emperor  had  par- 
ticularly required  the  presence  of  John  of  Antioch,  JSTesto- 
rius  insisted  on  waiting  till  he  came  ;  and  Candidian  sus- 
tained Nestorius.  Cyril  refused,  and  he  and  his  partisans 
assembled  in  the  Church  of  the  Virgin  Mary  to  proceed 

25  Schaff 's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  171,  par.  10. 


CONDEMNATION  OF  NE8TORIUS.  -J.91 

with  the  council.  As  soon  as  Count  Candidian  learned  of 
this,  he  hastened  to  the  church  to  forbid  it,  and  there  he  fell 
into  an  ecclesiastical  trap.  He  declared  that  they  were  act- 
ing in  defiance  of  the  imperial  rescript  which  was  to  guide 
the  council.  They  answered  that  as  they  had  not  seen  the 
rescript,  they  did  not  know  what  it  required  of  them.  The 
Count  read  it  to  them.  This  was  just  what  they  wanted. 
They  declared  that  tJt.e  reading  of  the  rescript  legalized  their 
meeting  !  They  greeted  it  with  "loud  and  loyal  clamors," 
pronounced  the  council  begun,  and  commanded  the  Count  to 
withdraw  from  an  assembly  in  which  he  had  no  longer  any 
legal  place. 

Candidian  protested  against  the  unfairness  of  the  pro- 
ceedings ;  and  then,  he  himself  says,  they  "  injuriously  and 
ignominiously  ejected  "  him.  They  next  expelled  all  the 
bishops,  sixty-eight  in  number,  who  were  known  to  favor 
Nestorius,  "and  then  commenced  their  proceedings  as  the 
legitimate  Senate  of  Christendom." — 3filman.srj 

One  of  Cyril's  presbyters  was  secretary,  and  he  for- 
mally opened  the  business  of  the  council  by  reading  a  state- 
ment of  the  dispute  that  had  brought  them  together.  Then 
the  emperor's  letter  calling  the  council  was  read.  They  sent 
four  bishops  to  notify  Nestorius  to  appear.  He  courteously 
refused  to  acknowledge  the  legality  of  their  assembly.  A 
second  deputation  of  four  bishops  was  sent,  and  they  returned 
with  the  word  that  they  were  not  allowed  by  the  guard  to 
go  near  him,  but  received  from  his  attendants  the  same 
answer  as  before.  A  third  deputation  of  four  was  sent,  and 
they  returned  with  the  report  that  they  were  subjected  to  the 
indignity  of  being  kept  standing  in  the  heat  of  the  sun,  and 
receiving  no  answer  at  all.  Having  made  such  an  earnest 
effort  to  have  Nestorius  present,  but  in  vain,  they  "sorrow- 
fully "  commenced  the  proceedings  without  him. 

The  Nicene  Creed  was  first  read,  and  then  Cyril's  letter 

25  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  49. 


422  MARY  IS  MADE    THE  MOTHER    OF   GOD. 

to  Nestorius,  with  the  twelve  propositions  and  their  accom- 
panying curses,  all  of  which  were  solemnly  confirmed  by  all 
the  bishops  in  succession. 

Then  was  read  the  letter  of  Nestorius  to  Cyril,  with  the 
twelve  counter-propositions  and  their  curses.  One  after 
another  the  bishops  arose  and  declared  the  propositions 
blasphemous,  and  vehemently  uttered  the  appended  curses. 
Then  when  the  list  was  completed,  they  all  arose,  and  with 
one  mighty  roar  that  made  the  arches  of  the  great  church 
echo  and  re-echo,  they  bawled,  "Anathema  to  him  who  does 
not  anathematize  Nestorius!  Anathema!  Anathema!  The 
n'Jiole  world  unites  in  the  excommunication!  Anathema  on 
him  who  holds  communion  with  Nestorius!  "  2o 

Next  were  read  the  letters  of  Celestine,  condemning  him, 
which  were  made  a  part  of  the  acts  of  the  council.  Then 
followed  the  reading  of  statements  from  the  writings  of 
Athanasius,  Peter  of  Alexandria,  Julius  I,  Felix  I  of  Rome  ; 
Theophihis  of  Alexandria,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  Basil  the  Great,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Atticus  of 
Constantinople,  and  Amphilochius  of  Iconium,  all  to  the 
effect  that  Mary  was  the  Mother  of  God.  Then  the  tender- 
hearted, pious  souls,  according  to  their  own  words,  proceeded 
"with  many  tears,  to  this  sorrowful  sentence  :  "- 

"As,  in  addition  to  other  things,  the  impious  Nestorius  has  not 
obeyed  our  citation,  and  did  not  receive  the  holy  bishops  who  were  sent 
by  us  to  him,  we  were  compelled  to  examine  his  ungodly  doctrines.  We 
discovered  that  he  had  held  and  published  impious  doctrines  in  his  letters 
and  treatises,  as  well  as  in  discourses  which  he  delivered  in  this  city,  and 
which  have  been  testified  to.  Urged  by  the  canons,  and  in  accordance 
with  the  letter  of  our  most  holy  father  and  fellow-servant  Celestine, 
the  Roman  bishop,  we  have  come,  with  many  tears,  to  this  sorrowful 
sentence  against  him,  namely,  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  whom  he  has 
blasphemed,  decrees  by  the  holy  synod  that  Nestorius  be  excluded  from 
the  episcopal  dignity,  and  from  all  priestly  communion."27 

25  Id.,  par.  22. 

27Hefele's  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  134,  par.  6 


W 
EH 

cc 
O 
525 

H^ 

O 

O 

- 


COUNCIL  AGAINST  COUNCIL. 

This  sentence  the  bishops  all  signed,  and  then  it  was 
sent  to  Nestorius,  addressed,  "To  Nestorius,  a  second  Judas." 
All  these  proceedings,  from  the  visit  and  protest  of  Can- 
didian  to  the  notice  to  Nestorius,  were  carried  through  in  a 
single  day  and  one  prolonged  sitting. 

It  was  now  night.  Criers  were  sent  all  through  the  city 
to  post  up  the  decrees  of  the  council,  and  to  announce  the 
joyful  news  that  Mary  was  indeed  the  Mother  of  God. 
Everywhere  they  were  met  with  loudest  shouts  of  joy.  The 
multitude  rushed  into  the  streets  and  poured  toward  the 
church.  With  lighted  torches  they  escorted  the  bishops  to 
their  abodes,  the  women  marching  before  and  burning  in- 
cense. The  whole  city  was  illuminated,  and  the  songs  and 
exultations  continued  far  into  the  night.  The  demonstration 
far  outdid  that  of  their  lineal  ancestors,  who,  when  they 
tried  to  kill  the  apostle  Paul,  "all  with  one  voice  about  the 
space  of  two  hours  cried  out,  Great  is  Diana  of  the 
Ephesians." 

Five  days  afterward  John  of  Antioch  with  his  bishops, 
arrived,  and  was  greatly  surprised  to  learn  that  the  council 
was  over.  He  got  together  about  fifty  bishops,  who  unani- 
mously condemned  the  doctrines  of  Cyril  and  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  council,  and  declared  accursed  all  the  bishops 
who  had  taken  part  in  it.  Cyril  and  Memnon  answered 
with  counter-curses.  Letters  came  from  Celestine,  and 
Cyril's  council  re-assembled  formally  to  receive  them. 
When  they  were  read,  the  whole  company  arose  and  again 
cried  with  one  voice  :  "  The  council  renders  thanks  to  the 
second  Paul,  Celestine  /  to  the  second  Paul,  Cyril :  to  Celes- 
tine, protector  of  the  faith  /  to  Celestine,  unanimous  with 
tJie  council.  One  Celestine,  one  Cyril,  one  faith  in  the  whole 
council,  one  faith  throughout  the  world  f"2* 

Cyril's  council  next  sent  messengers  with  overtures  to 
John,  who  refused  to  see  them.  Then  the  council  declared 

28Milman's  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  56. 


424     MART  IS  MADE  THE  MOTHER  OF  GOD. 

annulled  all  the  acts  of  John's  council,  and  deposed  and  ex- 
communicated him  and  all  the  bishops  of  his  party.  John 
threatened  to  elect  a  new  bishop  of  Ephesus  in  the  place  of 
Memnon,  whom  his  council  had  deposed.  A  party  tried  to 
force  their  way  into  the  cathedral  ;  but  finding  it  defended 
by  Memnon  with  a  strong  garrison,  they  retreated.  Mem- 
non's  forces  made  a  strong  sally,  and  drove  them  through 
the  streets  with  clubs  and  stones,  dangerously  wounding 
many. 

On  learning  that  the  council  had  been  held,  and  Nesto- 
rius  deposed  before  the  arrival  of  John  of  Antioch,  a  letter 
had  been  sent  down  from  the  court,  but  was  not  received 
till  this  point  in  the  contest.  This  letter  annulled  all  the 
proceedings  of  the  council,  and  commanded  a  re-considera- 
tion of  the  question  by  the  whole  assembly  of  the  bishops 
now  present.  The  letter  also  announced  the  appointment  of 
another  imperial  officer,  one  of  the  highest  officials  of  the 
State,  to  assist  Count  Candidian. 

The  court  had  not  made  known  in  Constantinople  the 
proceedings  of  the  council,  and  the  deposition  of  Nesto- 
rius.  Cyril  sent  away  a  secret  message  to  the  monks  of 
Constantinople,  announcing  that  Kestorius  had  been  de- 
posed and  excommunicated.  The  object  of  this  was  by 
stirring  up  those  fanatics  to  influence  the  court.  The 
weak-minded  Theodosius  II  stood  in  great  awe  of  the  holi- 
ness of  the  monks.  "His  palace  was  so  regulated  that  it 
differed  little  from  a  monastery."  In  422  there  died  one 
of  these  who  was  noted  for  that  kind  of  holiness  that  attaches 
to  a  monk,  and  Theodosius  secured  "his  cassock  of  sack-cloth 
of  hair,  which,  although  it  was  excessively  filthy,  he  wore  as  a 
cloak,  hoping  that  thus  he  should  become  a  partaker,  in  some 
degree,  of  the  sanctity  of  the  deceased."  —Socrates.™  And 
now,  on  receipt  of  Cyril's  message,  a  certain  Dalmatius, 
who  was  famous  for  his  filthy  sanctity,  left  his  cell  and  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  whole  herd  of  monks  and  archi- 

"9  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vii,  chap.  xxii. 


ALL  ALIKE  ORTHODOX.  495 

mandrites  in  and  about  Constantinople.  They  marched 
solemnly  through  the  streets,  and  everywhere  as  they 
passed,  the  populace  burst  into  curses  against  Nestorius. 
They  marched  to  the  palace  and  lounged  about  the  gates ; 
but  the  chief  influence  at  court  was  yet  favorable  to  Nes- 
torius,  and  their  demonstrations  had  no  immediate  effect. 

By  this  time  the  reports  of  both  parties  had  reached 
the  court.  Theodosius,  after  examining  both  accounts, 
approved  both,  and  pronounced  Nestorius,  Cyril,  and 
Memnon,  all  three  deposed.  As  for  their  faith,  he  pro- 
nounced them  "all  three  alike  orthodox,"  but  deposed 
them  as  a  punishment  which  he  said  they  all  three  alike 
deserved  as  being  the  chief  authors  of  continual  disturb- 
ances. 

The  new  imperial  commissioner  was  sent  down  to  Ephe- 
sus  with  the  letter  announcing  the  emperor's  decision.  As 
soon  as  he  arrived,  he  summoned  the  bishops  before  him. 
Memnon  refused  to  appear.  Those  who  did  come,  however, 
had  no  sooner  arrived  than  each  party  began  to  denounce 
the  other.  Cyril  and  his  party  pronounced  the  presence  of 
Nestorius  unendurable,  and  demanded  that  he  be  driven  out. 
The  party  of  Nestorius  and  John  of  Antioch,  just  as  sternly 
demanded  that  Cyril  should  be  expelled.  As  neither  party 
could  have  its  way,  they  began  to  fight.  The  imperial  com- 
missioner had  to  command  his  soldiers  to  separate  the  pugil- 
istic bishops  and  stop  the  fight.  When  order  had  thus  been 
enforced,  the  imperial  letters  were  read.  As  soon  as  the 
sentence  of  deposition  against  Cyril  and  Memnon  was  read, 
the  uproar  began  again,  and  another  fight  was  prevented 
only  by  the  arrest  of  the  three  chiefs.  Nestorius  and  John 
of  Antioch  submitted  without  remonstrance  ;  but  Cyril  made 
a  speech  "in  which  he  represented  himself  as  the  victim  of 
persecution,  incurred  by  apostolic  innocence,  and  borne  with 
apostolic  resignation,"  and  then  yielded  to  the  "inevitable 
necessity."  Memnon  was  hunted  up  and  also  taken  into 


426  MART  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF   GOD. 

custody.  Cyril  escaped,  and  with  his  body-guard  of  bath- 
men,  women,  and  sailors,  sailed  away  to  Alexandria. 

The  emperor  next  commanded  that  eight  bishops  of  each 
party  should  appear  in  his  presence  at  Constantinople.  They 
were  sent,  but,  on  account  of  the  desperate  temper  of  the 
monks  of  Constantinople,  it  was  counted  unsafe  for  them  to 
enter  the  city,  and  therefore  they  were  stopped  at  Chalcedon, 
on  the  opposite  side  of  the  Bosphorus.  There  the  emperor 
met  them.  The  whole  summer  had  been  spent  in  these  con- 
tentions of  the  council,  and  it  was  now  September  4,  when 
the  emperor  granted  them  the  first  audience.  Four  times  the 
emperor  had  them  appear  before  him,  arid  heard  them  fully. 

He  appeared  so  decidedly  to  favor  the  party  of  Nesto- 
rius,  that  they  thought  the  victory  was  already  won.  So  cer- 
tain were  they  of  this  that  they  even  sent  off  letters  to  their 
party  at  Ephesus,  instructing  them  to  send  up  a  message  of 
thanks  to  him  for  his  kindness.  But  at  the  fifth  meeting  all 
their  brilliant  prospects  were  blasted.  Cyril,  from  his  post  in 
Alexandria,  had  sent  up  thousands  of  pounds  of  gold,  with 
instructions  to  Maximian,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  to  add 
to  it,  not  only  the  wealth  of  that  church,  but  his  utmost  per- 
sonal effort  to  arouse  ''the  languid  zeal  of  the  princess 
Pulcheria  in  the  cause  of  Cyril,  to  propitiate  all  the  courtiers, 
and,  if  possible,  to  satisfy  their  rapacity."  —Milman.™ 

As  avarice  was  one  of  the  ruling  passions  of  the  eunuchs 
and  women  who  ruled  Theodosius  II,  "Every  avenue  of 
the  throne  was  assaulted  with  gold.  Under  the  decent 
names  of  eulogies  and  benedictions,  the  courtiers  of  both  sexes 
were  bribed  according  to  the  measure  of  their  rapaciousness. 
But  their  incessant  demands  despoiled  the  sanctuaries  of  Con- 
stantinople and  Alexandria  ;  and  the  authority  of  the  patri- 
arch was  unable  to  silence  the  just  murmur  of  his  clergy,  that  a 
debt  of  sixty  thousand  pounds  had  already  been  contracted  to 
support  the  expense  of  this  scandalous  corruption." — Gibbon.31 

30  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  64. 

31  "  Decline  and  Fall,''  chap,  xlvii,  par.  15. 


CYRIL  BRIBES   THE   COURT  AND    WINS.  437 

The  efforts  of  Cyril  were  at  last  effective.  The  eunuch 
Scholasticus,  one  of  the  chief  ministers  of  the  emperor  and 
the  supporter  of  the  cause  of  Nestorius  at  court,  was  bought  ; 
and  it  was  this  that  caused  the  sudden  revolution  in  the  em- 
peror's conduct  toward  the  party  of  Nestorius.  In  the  fifth 
and  last  audience  that  he  gave  the  deputies,  the  emperor  told 
them  at  once  that  they  had  better  abandon  Nestorius,  and 
admit  both  Cyril  and  Memnon  to  their  communion.  They 
remonstrated,  but  he  would  listen  to  nothing.  He  put  an 
end  to  the  hearings,  and  returned  the  next  day  to  Constanti- 
nople, taking  with  him  the  bishops  of  Cyril's  party,  regularly 
to  ordain  the  successor  of  Nestorius  in  the  bishopric  of  Con- 
stantinople. 

Shortly  afterward  an  imperial  edict  was  issued  declaring 
Nestorius  justly  deposed,  re-instating  Cyril  and  Memnon  in 
their  respective  sees,  pronouncing  all  the  other  bishops  alike 
orthodox,  and  giving  them  all  leave  to  return  to  their  homes. 
This  dissolved  the  council. 

Even  before  the  dissolution  of  the  council  the  emperor 
had  sent  an  order  to  Nestorius,  commanding  him  to  leave 
Ephesus  and  return  to  the  monastery  wrhence  he  had  been 
called  to  the  archbishopric  of  Constantinople.  By  the  per- 
sistent efforts  of  Celestine,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  others,  the 
emperor  was  induced  —  A.  D.  436  —  to  banish  him  and  two 
of  his  friends  —  a  count  of  the  empire  and  a  presbyter  of 
Constantinople  —  to  Petra  in  Arabia.  July  30,  in  the  same 
year,  an  imperial  edict  was  issued,  commanding  all  who  be- 
lieved with  Nestorius,  to  be  called  Simonians  ;  that  all  the 
books  by  Nestorius  should  be  sought  for  and  publicly  burnt ; 
forbidding  the  Nestorians  to  hold  any  meetings  anywhere, 
in  city,  in  village,  or  in  field  ;  and  if  any  such  meeting  was 
held,  then  the  place  where  it  was  held  should  be  confiscated, 
as  also  the  estates  of  all  who  should  attend  the  meeting. 
Nestorius  was  not  allowed  to  remain  long  at  Petra.  lie  was 
taken  from  there  to  a  place  away  in  the  desert  between 
Egypt  and  Libya,  and  from  there  dragged  about  from  place 


428  MARY  IS  MADE   THE  MOTHER   OF  GOD. 

to  place  till  he  died  of  the  hardships  inflicted,  at  what  date 
is  not  certainly  known,  but  about  A.  D.  440. 

Such  was  the  cause  and  such  the  conduct  of  the  first 
Council  of  Ephesus,  the  third  general  council  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  And  thus  was  established  the  Catholic  doctrine 
that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  the  Mother  of  God. 

The  controversy  went  on,  however,  nor  did  it  ever  logic- 
ally stop  until  December  8,  A.  D.  1854,  when  Pope  Pius 
IX  established  the  actual  divinity  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  by 
announcing  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception,  which 
reads  as  follows  : — 

"By  the  authority  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  of  the  blessed  apos- 
tles Peter  and  Paul,  as  well  as  by  our  own,  we  declare,  promulgate,  and 
define  that  the  doctrine  which  teaches  that  the  most  blessed  Virgin  Mary, 
at  the  very  instant  of  her  conception,  was  kept  free  from  every  stain  of 
original  sin  solely  by  the  grace  and  prerogative  of  the  omnipotent  God, 
in  consideration  of  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  mankind, 
was  revealed  by  God,  and  must  on  that  account  be  believed  firmly  and 
continually  by  all  the  faithful  ones."32 


32  "Encyclopedia  Britannica,"  article  "  Immaculate  Conception."  The  follow- 
ing is  the  original  as  there  given:  "  Auctoritate  Domini  Nostri  Jesu  Christi, 
beatorum  Apostolorum  Petri  et  Pauli,  ac  Nostra,  declaranras,  pronuntiamus  et  de- 
flnimus,  doctrinam,  quse  tenet  Beatissimam  Virginem  Mariam  in  primo  instant! 
suiB  Conceptions  fuisse  singulari  Omuipotentis  Dei  gratia  et  privilegio,  intuitu 
meritorum  Christi  Jesu,  Salvatoris  humani  generis,  ab  omni  originalis  culpae  labe 
praeservatam  immunem,  esse  a  Deo  revelatam,  atque  idcirco  ab  omnibus  fidelibus 
firmiter  constanterque  credendam." 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


THE    EUTYCHIAN    CONTROVERSY. 

IT  having  been  decided  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  the 
Mother  of  God,  out  of  that  decision  there  now  arose  an- 
other question  involving  the  nature  of  Christ.  That  ques- 
tion was  :  How  was  the  divine  nature  related  to  the  human 
so  that  Mary  could  truly  be  called  the  Mother  of  God? 
That  is,  Did  the  divine  nature  become  human  ?  or  was  the 
divine  nature  only  joined  to  the  human?  In  other  words  : 
Were  there  two  natures  in  Christ  ?  or  was  there  but  one  ? 

It  was  now  A.  D.  448,  and  the  Eutychian  controversy 
began.  For  a  clear  understanding  of  the  case,  it  will  be 
best  formally  to  introduce  the  leading  characters. 

Theodosius  II  was  still  emperor  of  the  East ;  Yalentinian 
III  was  emperor  of  the  West. 

Eutyches  was  the  abbot,  or  superior,  of  a  monastery  close 
to  Constantinople.  He  had  been  the  chief  leader  of  the 
monks  in  the  contest  against  Nestorius.  "At  his  bidding 
the  swarms  of  monks  had  thronged  into  the  streets,  defied 
the  civil  power,  terrified  the  emperor,  and  contributed  more 
than*  any  other  cause,  to  the  final  overthrow  of  Nestorius. 
He  had  grown  o!3  in  the  war  against  heresy."  —  Milman.1 

Flavianus  was  now  the  occupant  of  the  episcopal  seat  of 
Constantinople. 

Chrysaphius  was  another  eunuch,  who  had  risen  to  the 
place  of  chief  minister  of  Theodosius  II,  and  was  also  the 
godson  of  Eutyches.  He  was  carrying  on  a  court  intrigue 

1 "  Jlistory  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  22. 

[439] 


430  THE  ETTTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

to  break  the  power  of  Pulcheria,  by  exalting  the  influence 
of  Eudocia.  He  hoped  also  to  place  Eutyches  on  the  epis- 
copal throne  of  Constantinople.  The  accession  of  Flavi- 
anus  to  that  dignity  had  prevented  this  design  for  the  time 
being,  but  he  still  held  it  in  mind.  When  Flavianus  was 
installed  in  the  bishopric,  Chrysaphins  demanded  that  he 
should  make  to  the  emperor  the  offering  of  gold  that  was 
customary  on  such  occasions.  Instead  of  bringing  gold, 
Flavianus  brought  only  three  loaves  of  consecrated  bread. 
This,  Chrysaphius  so  employed  as  to  prejudice  the  emperor 
against  the  archbishop. 

Dioscorus  was  now  archbishop  of  Alexandria.  In  this 
place  it  will  be  sufficient  description  of  him  simply  to  re- 
mark that  he  was  a  second  Cyril,  and  leave  it  to  the  progress 
of  the  narrative  to  reveal  him  exactly  as  he  was. 

Leo  I,  "the  Great,"  wras  bishop  of  Kome,  and  regarded 
Dioscorus  as  "a  prelate  adorned  with  many  virtues,  and 
enriched  with  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost.''1 

Eusebius  was  bishop  of  Doryleum,  to  which  office  he 
had  been  appointed  from  a  civil  office  in  the  household  of 
Pulcheria.  He  also  had  been  an  early,  ardent,  and  persistent 
adversary  of  Nestorius.  This  Eusebius  now  stood  forth  as 
the  accuser  of  Eutyches. 

At  a  small  synod  which  had  been  called  for  another  pur- 
pose at  Constantinople,  November  8,  A.  D.  448,  Eusebius 
presented  a  written  complaint  against  Eutyches,  and  asked 
that  it  be  read.  The  complaint  was  to  the  effect  that  Euty- 
ches had  accused  of  Nestorianism  orthodox  teachers  —  even 
Eusebius  himself.  To  the  complaint  wa*s  appended  a  de- 
mand that  Eutyches  should  be  summoned  before  the  present 
synod  to  answer. 

As  for  Eusebius  himself,  he  announced  that  he  was  ready 
to  prove  that  Eutyches  had  "no  right  to  the  name  of  Catho- 
lic," and  that  he  was  "far  from  the  true  faith."  Flavianus 
expressed  surprise,  and  told  Eusebius  that  he  ought  to  go 

2  Bower's  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  22, 


THE   CONTROVERSY  BEGINS.  431 

to  Eutyches,  and,  by  a  private  interview,  try  to  convince 
him  of  the  true  faith  ;  and  if  then  he  really  showed  himself 
to  be  a  heretic,  he  would  cite  him  before  the  synod.  Euse- 
bius  said  he  had  been  to  him  several  times.  Flavianus  asked 
him  to  go  again  ;  but  he  refused,  and  then  the  synod  sent  a 
priest  and  a  deacon,  as  deputies  to  convey  to  Eutyches  the 
accusations,  and  summon  him  to  the  synod  which  would 
meet  again  in  four  days. 

The  synod  met  again,  November  12,  and  Eusebius  re- 
newed his  complaint,  with  the  addition  that  by  conversations 
and  discussions,  Eutyches  had  misled  many  others.  He 
then  suggested  that  the  synod  should  give  expression  to  the 
true  faith  on  the  question  that  had  been  raised.  Flavianus 
produced  a  letter  which  Cyril  had  written  to  Nestorius  at 
the  beginning  of  the  controversy  between  them  ;  the  act  of 
the  Council  of  Ephesus  which  approved  this  letter ;  and  an- 
other letter,  which  Cyril  had  written,  about  the  close  of  that 
controversy.  He  required  the  bishops  present  to  assent  to 
the  statements  therein  contained,  as  the  expression  of  the 
true  faith  according  to  the  Nicene  Creed,  which  they  had 
always  believed  and  still  believed,  namely  :  — 

"Jesus  Christ,  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God,  is  true  God  and  true 
man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and  a  body  subsisting,  begotten  of  the  Father 
before  all  time,  without  beginning,  according  to  the  Godhead,  but  in  the 
last  times,  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
according  to  the  manhood  ;  of  one  substance  with  the  Father  according 
to  the  Godhead,  and  of  one  substance  with  his  mother,  according  to  the 
manhood.  We  confess  that  Christ  after  the  Incarnation  consists  of  two 
natures  in  one  hypostasis  [personality]  and  in  one  person  ;  one  Christ, 
one  Son,  one  Lord.  Whoever  asserts  otherwise,  we  exclude  from  the 
clergy  and  the  church."3 

This  they  all  signed,  and  then  at  the  suggestion  of  Euse- 
bius it  was  sent  to  those  who  were  absent  for  them  to  sign. 

The  next  session  of  the  synod  was  held  November  15,  and 
the  deputies  who  had  been  sent  10  Eutyches  reported  that 
he  had  refused  to  come,  for  the  reason  that  when  he  became 

3Hefele's  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  172,  par.  3. 
34 


4:32  THE  EUTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

a  monk,  he  resolved  never  to  leave  the  monastery  to  go  to  any 
place  whatever.  Besides,  he  told  them  that  the  synod  ought 
to  know  that  Eusebius  had  long  been  his  enemy,  and  that  it 
was  only  out  of  malice  that  he  now  accused  him.  He  said 
he  was  ready  to  affirm  and  subscribe  the  declarations  of  the 
Councils  of  Nice  and  Ephesus.  The  synod  summoned  him 
again,  and  again  he  refused  to  come.  Then  Eusebius  de- 
clared, "The  guilty  have  ever  ways  of  escaping  ;  Eutyches 
must  now  be  brought  here,  even  against  his  will."  The 
synod  then  summoned  him  the  third  time. 

At  the  next  meeting  a  messenger  came  from  Eutyches, 
saying  that  he  was  sick.  Flavianus  told  him  the  synod 
would  wait  until  Eutyches  got  well,  but  that  then  he  must 
come.  At  the  next  meeting,  the  deputies  who  had  been 
sent  with  the  third  summons,  reported  that  Eutyches  had 
told  them  that  he  had  sent  his  messenger  to  the  archbishop 
and  the  synod  that  he  might  in  his  name  give  his  assent  to 
the  declarations  of  the  councils  of  Nice  and  Ephesus,  "and 
to  all  that  Cyril  had  uttered."  At  this  Eusebius  broke  in 
with  the  declaration,  "Even  if  Eutyches  will  now  assent, 
because  some  have  told  him  that  he  must  yield  to  necessity 
and  subscribe,  yet  /  am  not  therefore  in  the  wrong,  for  it  is 
with  reference,  not  to  the  future,  but  to  the  past,  that  I  have 
accused  him." ^  The  deputies  then  closed  with  the  informa- 
tion that  he  would  come  to  the  synod  on  the  next  Monday. 

At  the  appointed  time,  Eutyches  came  ;  but  he  did  not 
come  alone.  He  came  accompanied  by  a  messenger  of  the 
emperor's  privy  council,  and  escorted  by  a  great  crowd  com- 
posed of  soldiers,  and  servants  of  the  praetorian  prefect,  and 
"a  rout  of  turbulent  monks."  The  emperor's  representa- 
tive bore  a  letter  to  the  synod,  in  which  the  emperor 
said  :  — 

"I  wish  the  peace  of  the  church  and  the  maintenance  of  the  orthodox 
faith,  which  was  asserted  by  the  Fathers  at  Nicsea  and  Ephesus  ;  and  be- 
cause I  know  that  the  patrician  Florentius  is  orthodox,  and  proved  in 

*  Id.,  par.  13. 


EUSEBIUS  IN  A  DILEMMA.  433 

the  faith,  therefore  it  is  my  will  that  he  be  present  at  the  sessions  of  the 
synod,  as  the  faith  is  in  question."  5 

At  this  the  bishops  cried  out,  ' '  Many  years  to  the  emperor, 
his  faith  is  great!  Many  years  to  tJie  pious,  orthodox,  high- 
priestly  emperor.''''  Then  the  emperor's  commissioner  took 
his  place,  and  Eusebius  and  Eutyches,  the  accuser  and  the 
accused,  placed  themselves  in  the  midst.  The  first  thing 
was  to  read  the  proceedings  from  the  beginning  up  to  this 
point,  the  vital  part  of  which  was  the  declarations  to  which 
they  had  demanded  that  Eutyches  should  give  his  assent. 
The  reader  read  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  there  was  no  dissent. 
He  read  the  first  of  Cyril's  letters,  yet  there  was  no  dissent. 
He  read  the  decision  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  and  still 
there  was  no  dissent.  Then  he  began  the  second  of  Cyril's 
letters  and  read  :  — 

"We  confess  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  perfect  God  and  perfect  man, 
and  as  of  one  substance  with  the  Father  according  to  the  Godhead,  and 
of  one  substance  with  us  according  to  the  manhood  ;  for  a  union  of  the 
two  natures  has  taken  place,  therefore  we  confess  one  Christ,  one  Lord, 
and,  in  accordance  witli  this  union  without  confusion,  we  call  the  holy 
Virgin  God-bearer,  because  God  the  Logos  was  made  flesh  and  man,  and 
in  the  conception  united  the  temple  which  he  assumed  from  her  with 
himself  — " 6 

At  this  point  Eusebius  broke  in.  Seeing  the  reading  was 
nearly  finished  with  no  sign  of  dissent,  he  was  afraid  that 
Eutyches  would  actually  approve  all  the  declarations,  which 
doubtless  he  would  have  done.  He  therefore  interrupted 
the  reading,  with  the  exclamation,  "Certainly  such  is  not 
confessed  by  this  man  here  ;  he  has  never  believed  this,  but 
the  contrary,  and  so  he  has  taught  every  one  who  has  come 
to  him."  Elorentius  asked  that  Eutyches  might  be  given  a 
chance  to  say  for  himself  "whether  he  agreed  with  what  had 
been  read."  To  this  Eusebins  vehemently  objected,  for  the 
reason,  said  he,  "  If  Eatyches  agrees  to  it,  then  I  must  ap- 
pear as  having  been,  lightly  a  slanderer,  and  shall  LOSE  M\ 
OFFICE  "/  / 

*  Id.  par.  21.  "A/.,  par.  :>2. 


THE  EUTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

Florentius  renewed  his  request  that  Eutyches  might  be 
allowed  to  answer ;  but  Eusebius  strenuously  objected. 
And  he  only  consented  at  the  last,  on  the  express  condition 
that  no  prejudice  should  lodge  against  him,  even  though 
Eutyches  should  confess  all  that  was  required.  Elavianus 
confirmed  this  condition,  with  the  assurance  that  not  the 
slightest  disadvantage  should  come  to  Eusebius.  But  even 
then  Eutyches  was  not  allowed  to  answer  in  his  own  way, 
because  the  predicament  in  which  Eusebius  had  found  him- 
self, involved  in  a  measure  the  whole  synod  also,  as  they 
had  given  full  credit  to  the  charges  of  Eusebius,  and  had 
refused  all  the  assurances  of  Eutyches  that  he  agreed  to  all 
the  documents  which  they  had  cited.  Flavianus  and  Euse- 
bius, therefore,  in  order  to  save  themselves  from  defeat  and 
perhaps  deposition,  if  the  matter  should  come  to  a  general 
council,  determined  if  possible  to  entrap  Eutyches  in  some 
statement  which  they  could  condemn.  The  proceedings 
then  were  as  follows  :  — 

Flavianus. —  '"Say  now,  dost  thou  acknowledge  the 
union  of  two  natures  ?  " 

Eutyches. —  "I  believe  that  Christ  is  perfect  God  and 
perfect  man,  but  here  I  stop,  and  advise  you  to  do  so  too." 

Eusebius. —  "Dost  thou  confess  the  existence  of  two 
natures,  even  after  the  incarnation,  and  that  Christ  is  of  one 
nature  writh  us  after  the  flesh,  or  not  ? " 

Eutyclies. —  "I  have  not  come  to  dispute,  but  to  testify 
to  your  Holiness  what  I  think.  My  view,  however,  is  set 
down  in  this  writing  ;  command,  therefore,  that  it  be  read." 

Flamamts. —  "  If  it  is  thine  own  confession  of  faith,  why 
shouldst  thou  need  the  paper  ? " 

Eutyches. —  "That  is  my  belief:  I  pray  to  the  Father 
with  the  Son,  and  to  the  Son  with  the  Father,  and  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  with  the  Father  and  Son.  I  confess  that  his 
bodily  presence  is  from  the  body  of  the  holy  Virgin,  and 
that  he  became  perfect  man  for  our  salvation.  This  I  con- 


FORECAST  OF   THE  INQUISITION.  435 

fess  before  the  Father,  before  the  Son,  and  before  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  before  your  holiness." 

Flavianm.  —  "Dost  thou  confess  also  that  the  one  and 
the  same  Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  of  one  substance 
with  the  Father  as  to  his  Godhead,  and  of  one  substance 
with  his  mother  as  to  his  manhood  ? " 

Eutyches.  —  "I  have  already  declared  my  opinion  ;  leave 
me  now  in  peace." 

Flavian-its.  —  "Dost  thou  confess  that  Christ  consists  of 
two  natures  ?  " 

Eutyches.  —  "I  have  not  hitherto  presumed  to  dispute 
concerning  the  nature  of  my  God  ;  but  that  he  is  of  one 
substance  with  us,  have  I  hitherto,  as  I  affirm,  never  said. 
Up  to  this  present  day  have  I  never  said  that  the  body  of 
our  Lord  and  God  is  of  one  substance  with  us.  I  do  con- 
fess, however,  that  the  holy  Virgin  is  of  one  substance  with 
us,  and  that  our  God  is  made  of  our  flesh." 

Fla/uianus,  Florentine,  and  Basil  of  Seleucia.  —  "If 
thou  dost  acknowledge  that  Mary  is  of  one  substance  with 
us,  and  that  Christ  has  taken  his  manhood  from  her,  then 
it  follows  of  itself  that  he,  according  to  his  manhood,  is 
also  of  one  substance  with  us." 

Eutyches.  —  "Consider  well,  I  say  not  that  the  body  of 
man  has  become  the  body  of  God,  but  I  speak  of  a  human 
body  of  God,  and  say  that  the  Lord  was  made  flesh  of  the 
Yirgin.  If  you  wish  me  to  add  further  that  his  body  is  of 
one  substance  with  ours,  then  I  do  this  ;  but  I  do  not  under- 
stand this  as  though  I  denied  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God. 
Formerly  I  did  not  generally  speak  of  a  unity  of  sub- 
stance, but  now  I  will  do  so,  because  your  Holiness  thus 
requires  it." 

Fla/oianus.  —  "Thou. doest  it  then  only  of  compulsion, 
and  not  because  it  is  thy  faith  ?  " 

Eutyches.  —  "I  have  not  hitherto  so  spoken,  but  will  do 
so  now  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  the  synod." 


436  THE  EUTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

Florentine.  --  "  Dost  thou  believe  that  our  Lord,  who 
was  born  of  the  Virgin,  is  of  one  substance  with  us,  and 
that  after  the  incarnation  he  is  of  two  natures,  or  not  ? " 

Eutyches.  —  "I  confess  that  before  the  union  he  was  of 
two  natures,  but  after  the  union  I  confess  only  one  nature." 

At  this  "the  whole  council  was  in  an  uproar,  and  noth- 
ing was  heard  but  anathemas  and  curses,  each  bishop  there 
present  striving  to  distinguish  himself  above  the  rest,  by 
being  the  foremost  in  uttering  the  most  bitter  and  severe  his 
zeal  could  suggest."-  —  Ilower.1  When  the  noise  had  ceased, 
Flaviamis,  in  the  name  of  the  synod,  demanded  of  Eutyches 
a  public  declaration  of  his  faith  in,  and  a  curse  upon  every 
view  that  did  not  accept,  the  doctrines  which  had  been  set 
forth  by  the  synod. 

Eutyches. — "I  will  now  indeed,  since  the  synod  so  re- 
quires, accept  the  manner  of  speech  in  question  ;  but  I  find 
it  neither  in  Holy  Scripture  nor  in  the  Fathers  collectively, 
and  therefore  cannot  pronounce  a  curse  upon  the  non-accept- 
ance of  the  question,  because  that  would  be  cursing  the 
Fathers." 

All  together  (springing  to  their  feet}. — "Let  him  be  ac- 
cursed ! " 

Flamanus. — "  What  does  this  man  deserve  who  does  not 
confess  the  right  faith,  but  persists  in  his  perverseness  ? " 

Eutyches.  —  "I  will  now  indeed  accept  the  required  man- 
ner of  speaking  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  the  synod, 
but  cannot  pronounce  the  curse." 

Florentine. —  "Dost  thou  confess  two  natures  in  Christ, 
and  his  unity  of  substance  with  us  ?  " 

Eutyches. — "I  read  the  writings  of  St.  Cyril  and  St. 
Athanasius :  before  the  union  they  speak  of  two  natures, 
but  after  the  union  only  of  one." 

Florentius. — "  Dost  thou  confess  two  natures  even  after 
the  union?  If  not,  then  wilt  thou  be  condemned." 

7  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  24. 


A    GENERAL   COUNCIL  18  DEMANDED.  43? 

Eutyche*. — "Let  the  writings  of  Cyril  and  Athanasius 
be  read." 

Basil  of  Seleutia. — "If  thou  dost  not  acknowledge  two 
natures  after  the  union  also,  then  thou  acceptest  a  mingling 
and  confusion." 

Florentines. — "He  who  does  not  say  ^  of  two  natures^ 
and  who  does  not  acknowledge  two  natures,  has  not  the 
right  faith." 

All  together. —  "And  he  who  accepts  anything  only  by 
compulsion  does  not  believe  in  it.  Long  live  the  em- 
perors !  " 

Flavianus,  announcing  the  sentence.  —  "  Eutyches,  a 
priest  and  archimandrite,  has,  by  previous  statements,  and 
even  now  by  his  own  confessions,  shown  himself  to  be  en- 
tangled in  the  perversity  of  Valentinus  and  Apollinaris, 
without  allowing  himself  to  be  won  back  to  the  genuine 
dogmas  by  our  exhortation  and  instruction  ;  therefore  we, 
bewailing  his  complete  perversity,  have  decreed,  for  the 
sake  of  Christ  whom  he  has  reviled,  that  he  be  deposed 
from  every  priestly  office,  expelled  from  our  communion, 
and  deprived  of  his  headship  over  the  convent.  And  all 
who  henceforth  hold  communion  with  him,  and  have  re- 
course to  him,  must  know  that  they  too  are  liable  to  the 
penalty  of  excommunication."8 

The  sentence  was  subscribed  by  all  the  synod,  about 
thirty  in  number,  and  the  synod  was  dissolved,  November 
22,  A.  D.  448. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  follow  the  particulars  any  farther  ; 
as  in  every  other  controversy,  the  dispute  speedily  spread  far 
and  wide.  The  decree  of  the  synod  was  sent  by  Flavianus 
to  all  the  other  bishops  for  their  indorsement.  As  soon  as 
the  action  of  the  synod  had  been  announced,  Dioscorus, 


8Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  172,  par.  22-24;  and  Bow- 
er's "History of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  46. 


438  THE  EUTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

with  all  his  powers,  espoused  the  cause  of  Eutyches. 
Through  Chrysaphius  the  Eunuch,  Eutyches  was  already 
powerful  at  court,  and  added  to  this  the  disfavor  in  which 
Flavianus  was  already  held  by  the  emperor,  the  war  as- 
sumed powerful  proportions  at  the  start. 

The  next  step  was,  of  course,  for  both  parties  to  appeal  to 
the  bishop  of  Rome.  Eutyches  felt  perfectly  safe  in  appeal- 
ing to  Leo,  because  he  had  the  words  of  Julius,  bishop  of 
Home,  saying,  "It  must  not  be  said  that  there  are  two 
natures  in  Christ  after  their  union  ;  for  as  the  body  and  soul 
form  but  one  nature  in  man,  so  the  divinity  and  humanity 
form  but  one  nature  in  Christ."  This  being  precisely  the 
view  of  Eutyches,  he  felt  perfectly  confident  in  his  appeal  to 
Leo,  for  he  could  not  suppose  that  Leo  would  contradict 
Julius.  He  shortly  foujid  that  such  a  hope  was  altogether 
vain. 

The  emperor  also  wrote  to  the  bishop  of  Rome.  It 
seems  that  Leo  did  not  make  any  answer  to  Eutyches  direct. 
To  Flavianus  he  sent  a  request  for  a  fuller  account  of  the 
whole  matter,  and  that  it  should  be  sent  by  an  envoy.  To 
the  emperor  he  wrote  rejoicing  that  Theodosius  "has  not 
only  the  heart  of  an  emperor,  but  also  that  of  a  priest,  and 
is  rightly  anxious  that  no  discord  should  arise  ;  for  then  is 
the  empire  best  established  when  the  holy  Trinity  is  served 
in  unity."10 

Dioscorus  seeing  now  a  chance  of  humbling  the  arch- 
bishop of  Constantinople,  joined  Eutyches  in  a  request  to 
the  emperor  to  call  a  general  council.  Chrysaphius,  seeing 
again  a  prospect  of  accomplishing  his  favorite  project  to 
make  Eutyches  archbishop  of  Constantinople,  strongly  sup- 
ported this  request.  But  Theodosius,  after  his  experience 
with  the  council  at  Ephesus,  dreaded  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  another  one,  and  sought  to  ward  off  another  calamity 

9  Bower,  Id.,  par.  25. 

10Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  173,  par.  10. 


THE  SECOND   GENERAL   COUNCIL   OF  EPHESUS.     439 

of  the  kind.     But  there  was  no  remedy  ;  the  tiling  had  to 
come. 

Accordingly,  March  30,  A.  D.  449,  a  message  in  the 
name  of  the  two  emperors,  Theodosius  II  and  Valentinian  III, 
was  issued,  announcing  that  "as  doubts  arid  controversies 
have  arisen  respecting  the  right  faith,  the  holding  of  an 
oacumenical  synod  has  become  necessary."  Therefore  the 
archbishops,  metropolitans,  and  "other  holy  bishops  dis- 
tinguished for  knowledge  and  character,"  should  assemble 
at  Ephesus  August  1 .  A  special  edict  was  sent  to  Dioscorus, 
saying  :  - 

"The  emperor  has  already  forbidden  Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  on  account 
of  his  writings  against  Cyril,  to  take  part  in  the  synod,  unless  he  is  ex- 
pressly summoned  by  the  synod  itself.  Because,  however,  it  is  to  be 
feared  that  some  Nestorianizing  bishops  will  use  every  means  in  order 
to  bring  him  with  them,  the  emperor,  following  the  rule  of  the  holy 
Fathers,  will  nominate  Dioscorus  to  be  president  of  the  synod.  Arch- 
bishop Juvenal  of  Jerusalem  and  Thalassius  of  Csesarea,  and  all  zealous 
friends  of  the  orthodox  faith,  will  support  Dioscorus.  In  conclusion,  the 
emperor  expresses  the  wish  that  all  who  shall  desire  to  add  anything  to 
the  Nicene  confession  of  faith,  or  take  anything  from  it,  snail  not  be 
regarded  in  the  synod  ;  but  on  this  point  Dioscorus  shall  give  judgment, 
since  it  is  for  this  very  purpose  that  the  synod  is  convoked." 

Leo  was  specially  invited  ;  and  a  certain  Barsumas,  a 
priest  and  superior  of  a  monastery  in  Syria,  was  called 
as  the  representative  of  the  monks,  and  Dioscorus  was 
directed  to  receive  him  as  such,  and  give  him  a  seat  in 
the  council. 

Not  willing  to  wait  for  the  decision  of  the  question  by 
the  coming  general  council,  Leo  took  occasion  to  assert  his 
authority  over  all ;  and  June  13  sent  a  letter  to  Flavianus, 
in  which  he  indorsed  the  action  of  the  Synod  of  Constanti- 
nople as  far  as  it  went,  but  reproved  the  synod  for  treating 
the  matter  so  mildly  as  it  had  done,  and  himself  took  the 
strongest  ground  against  Eutyches.  In  answer  to  the  re- 
quest of  the  emperor  that  he  should  attend  the  general 


440  THE  EUTTCHIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

council,  Leo  declined  to  attend  in  person,  but  promised  to 
be  present  by  Legates  a  Latere. 

The  council,  composed  of  one  hundred  and  forty-nine 
members,  met  in  the  Church  of  the  Virgin  Mary  at  Ephesus, 
and  was  formally  opened  August  8,  A.  D.  449.  Dioscorus, 
the  president,  was  seated  upon  a  high  throne.  Two  imperial 
commissioners,  Elpidius  and  Eulogius,  were  in  attendance 
with  a  strong  body  of  troops  to  keep  order  in  the  council, 
and  preserve  peace  in  the  city.  The  council  was  opened 
with  the  announcement  by  the  secretary,  that  "  the  God- 
fearing emperors  have  from  zeal  for  religion,  convoked 
this  assembly."  Then  the  imperial  message  calling  the 
council  was  read,  and  next  the  two  legates  of  the  bishop 
of  Rome  announced  that  though  invited  by  the  emperor, 
Leo  did  not  appear  in  person,  but  had  sent  a  letter.  Next 
Elpidius,  the  imperial  commissioner,  made  a  short  speech, 
in  which  he  said  :  — 

"The  Logos  has  on  this  day  permitted  the  assembled  bishops  to  give 
judgment  upon  him.  If  you  confess  him  rightly,  then  he  also  will  con- 
fess you  before  his  heavenly  Father.  But  those  who  shall  prevent  the 
true  doctrine  will  have  to  undergo  a  severe  two-fold  judgment,  that  of 
God  and  that  of  the  emperor."12 

Next  was  read  the  emperor's  instructions  to  the  two  im- 
perial commissioners,  which  ran  as  follows  :  - 

"But  lately  the  holy  Synod  of  Ephesus  has  been  engaged  with  the 
affairs  of  the  impious  Nestorius,  and  has  pronounced  a  righteous  sentence 
on  him.  Because,  however,  new  controversies  of  faith  have  arisen,  we 
have  summoned  a  second  synod  to  Ephesus,  in  order  to  destroy  the  evil  to 
the  roots.  We  have  therefore  selected  Elpidius  and  Eulogius  for  the  serv- 
ice of  the  faith  in  order  to  fulfill  our  commands  in  reference  to  the  Synod 
of  Ephesus.  In  particular,  they  must  allow  no  disturbances,  and  they 
must  arrest  every  one  who  arouses  such,  and  inform  the  emperor  of  him ; 
they  must  take  care  that  everything  is  done  in  order,  must  be  present  at 
the  decisions,  and  take  care  that  the  synod  examine  the  matter  quickly 
and  carefully,  and  give  information  of  the  same  to  the  emperor.  Those 
12  Id.,  sec.  178,  par.  5. 


EUTTCHES  IS  DECLARED   ORTHODOX.  44! 

bishops  who  previously  sat  in  judgment  on  Eutyches(  at  Constantinople ) 
are  to  be  present  at  the  proceedings  at  Ephesus,  but  are  not  to  vote, 
since  their  own  previous  sentence  must  be  examined  anew.  Further, 
no  other  question  is  to  be  brought  forward  at  the  synod,  and  especially 
no  question  of  money,  before  the  settlement  of  the  question  of  faith. 
By  a  letter  to  the  proconsul,  we  have  required  support  for  the  com- 
missioners from  the  civil  and  military  authorities,  so  that  they  may  be 
able  to  fulfill  our  commissions,  which  are  as  far  above  other  business  as 
divine  above  human  things."  13 

Following  this  was  read  a  letter  from  the  emperor  to 
the  council  itself,  in  which  he  said  :  — 

"The  emperor  has  adjudged  it  necessary  to  call  this  assembly  of 
bishops,  that  they  might  cut  off  this  controversy  and  all  its  diabolical 
roots,  exclude  the  adherents  of  Nestorius  from  the  church,  and  pre- 
serve the  orthodox  faith  firm  and  unshaken  ;  since  the  whole  hope  of 
the  emperor  and  the  power  of  the*empire,  depend  on  the  right  faith 
in  God  and  the  holy  prayers  of  the  synod."  u 

The  council  was  now  formally  opened,  and  according  to  the 
instructions  of  the  emperor  they  proceeded  first  to  consider 
the  faith.  But  upon  this  a  dispute  at  once  arose  as  to  what 
was  meant  by  the  faith.  Some  insisted  that  this  meant  that 
the  council  should  first  declare  its  faith  ;  but  Dioscorus  inter- 
preted it  to  mean  not  that  the  faith  should  first  be  declared, 
for  this  the  former  council  had  already  done,  but  rather  that 
they  were  to  consider  which  of  the  parties  agreed  with  what  the 
true  faith  explains.  And  then  he  cried  out :,  "  Or  will  you 
alter  the  faith  of  the  holy  Fathers  f  "  In  answer  to  this  there 
were  cries,  ' '  Accursed  he  he  wlio  makes  alterations  in  it  /  ac- 
cursed he  he  who  ventures  to  discuss  the  faith.'1'' 

Next  Dioscorus  took  a  turn  by  which  he  covertly  an- 
nounced what  was  expected  of  the  council.  He  said  :  "At 
Nica^a  and  at  Ephesus  the  true  faith  has  already  been  pro- 
claimed ;  but  although  there  have  been  two  synods,  the 
faith  is  but  one."  In  response  to  this  there  were  loud  shouts 
from  the  assembly,  "No  one  dare  add  anything  or  take  any- 
13  Id.,  sec.  175,  par.  3.  "  Id.,  par.  6. 


442  THE  EUTTCIIIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

tldng  away.  A  great  guardian  of  the  faith  is  Dioscorus. 
Accursed  l>e  he  who  still  discusses  the  faith  y  the  Holy  Ghost 
speaks  by  Dioscorus. " 15 

Eutyches  was  now  introduced  to  the  council,  that  he  might 
explain  his  faith.  He  first  commended  himself  to  the  holy 
Trinity,  and  censured  the  Synod  of  Constantinople.  He 
then  handed  to  the  secretary  a  written  confession,  in  which 
he  repeated  the  Nicene  Creed,  indorsed  the  acts  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Ephesus  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Father  Cyril, 
and  cursed  all  heretics  from  Nestorius  clear  -back  to  Simon 
Magus,  who  had  been  rebuked  by  the  apostle  Peter.  He 
then  gave  an  account  of  the  proceedings  against  himself. 
When  this  had  been  read,  Flavianus  demanded  that  Eu- 
sebius  should  be  heard ;  but  the  imperial  commissioners 
stopped  him  with  the  statement  that  they  were  not  called 
together  to  judge  Eutyches  anew,  but  to  judge  those  who  had 
judged  him,  and  that  therefore  the  only  legitimate  business 
of  the  council  was  to  examine  the  acts  of  the  Synod  of 
Constantinople. 

Accordingly  the  proceedings  of  that  synod  were  taken 
up.  All  went  smoothly  enough  until  the  reader  came  to  the 
point  where  the  synod  had  demanded  of  Eutyches  that  he 
should  acknowledge  two  natures  in  Christ  after  the  incarna- 
tion. When  this  was  read,  there  was  an  uproar  against  it  in 
the  council,  as  there  had  been  against  the  statement  of 
Eutyches  in  the  synod  ;  only  the  uproar  here  wTas  as  much 
greater  than  there,  as  the  council  was  greater  than  the 
synod.  The  council  cried  with  one  voice,  '•'•Away  with 
Eusebius  !  banish  Eusebius  !  let  him  be  burned  alive  !  As 
lie  cuts  asunder  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  so  be  he  cut 
asunder  /  " 16 

Dioscorus  asked:  "Is  the  doctrine  that  there  are  two 
natures  after  the  incarnation  to  be  tolerated  ?  "  Aloud  the 

15  Id.,  sec.  178,  par.  6,  7. 

16Milman's  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  30. 


THE    UNITY   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  443 

council  replied  :  ' '  Accursed  l)e  lie  who  says  so. "  Again 
Dioscorus  cried:  "  I  have  your  voices,  I  must  have  your 
hands.  He  that  cannot  cry  loud  enough  to  be  heard,  let 
him  lift  up  his  hands."  Then  with  uplifted  hands  the  coun- 
cil unanimously  bellowed  :  "  Whoever  admits  the  two 
natures,  let  him  he  accursed;  let  him  he  driven  oxt,  torn  in 
pieces,  massacred.''''1'' 

Eutyches  was  then  unanimously  pronounced  orthodox 
and  declared  restored  to  the  communion  of  the  church,  to 
the  government  of  his  monastery,  and  to  all  his  former 
privileges  ;  and  he  was  exalted  as  a  hero  for  "  his  courage 
in  daring  to  teach,  and  his  firmness  in  daring  to  defend, 
che  true  and  genuine  doctrine  of  the  Fathers.  And  on  this 
occasion,  those  distinguished  themselves  the  most  by  their 
panegyrics,  who  had  most  distinguished  themselves  by  their 
invectives  before."  -Sower.1* 

Dioscorus  having  everything  in  his  own  power,  now  de- 
termined to  visit  vengeance  upon  the  archbishop  of  Con- 
stantinople. Under  pretense  that  it  was  for  the  instruction 
of  his  colleagues,  he  directed  that  the  acts  of  the  previous 
Council  of  Ephesus  concerning  the  Nicene  Creed,  etc., 
should  be  read.  As  soon  as  the  reading  was  finished,  he 
said  :  "  You  have  now  heard  that  the  first  Synod  of  Ephesus 
threatens  every  one  who  teaches  otherwise  than  the  Nicene 
Creed,  or  makes  alterations  in  it,  and  raises  new  or  further 
questions.  Every  one  must  now  give  his  opinion  in  writing 
as  to  whether  those  who,  in  their  theological  inquiries,  go 
beyond  the  Nicene  Creed,  are  to  be  punished  or  not."  19 

This  was  aimed  directly  at  Flavianus  and  Eusebms  of 
Doryleeum,  as  they  had  expressed  the  wish  that  the  expres- 
sion "two  natures"  might  be  inserted  in  the  Nicene  Creed. 
To  the  statement  of  Dioscorus,  several  bishops  responded  at 
once  :  "Whoever  goes  beyond  the  Nicene  Creed  is  not  to 

17  Bower's  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  81.  isld. 

"Hefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  178,  par.  15. 


4:4:4:  THE  EUTYCIIIAN  CONTROVERSY. 

be  received  as  a  Catholic.*'  Then  Dioscorus  continued: 
"As  then  the  first  Synod  of  Ephesus  threatens  every  one 
who  alters  anything  in  the  Nicene  faith,  it  follows  that  Fla- 
vianus  of  Constantinople  and  Eusebius  of  Dorylaeum  must 
be  deposed  from  their  ecclesiastical  dignity.  I  pronounce, 
therefore,  their  deposition,  and  every  one  of  those  present 
shall  communicate  his  view  of  this  matter.  Moreover  every- 
thing will  be  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  emperor." 

Flavianus  replied:  "  /  except  against  you,"  and,  to  take 
time  by  the  forelock,  placed  a  written  appeal  in  the  hands 
of  the  legates  of  Leo.  Several  of  the  friends  of  Flavianus 
left  their  seats,  and  prostrating  themselves  before  the  throne 
of  Dioscorus,  begged  him  not  to  inflict  such  a  sentence,  and 
above  all  that  he  would  not  ask  them  to  sign  it.  He  replied, 
' '  Though  my  tongue  were  to  be  cut  out,  I  would  not  alter  a 
single  syllable  of  it"  Trembling  for  their  own  fate  if  they 
should  refuse  to  subscribe,  the  pleading  bishops  now  em- 
braced his  knees,  and  entreated  him  to  spare  them  ;  but  he 
angrily  exclaimed  :  "  What!  do  you  think  to  raise  a  tumult  f 
Where  are  the  counts  f  " 

At  this  the  counts  ordered  the  doors  to  be  thrown  open, 
and  the  proconsul  of  Asia  entered  with  a  strong  body  of 
armed  troops,  followed  by  a  confused  multitude  of  furious 
monks,  armed  with  chains,  and  clubs,  and  stones.  Then 
there  was  a  general  scramble  of  the  "holy  bishops  "  to  find  a 
refuge.  Some  took  shelter  behind  the  throne  of  Dioscorus, 
others  crawled  under  the  benches  —  all  concealed  themselves 
as  best  they  could.  Dioscorus  declared  :  "  The  sentence 
must  he  signed.  If  any  one  objects  to  it,  let  him  take  care  /  for 
it  is  with  me  he  has  to  deal."  The  bishops,  when  they  found 
that  they  were  not  to  be  massacred  at  once,  crept  out  from 
under  the  benches  and  from  other  places  of  concealment, 
and  returned  trembling  to  their  seats. 

Then  Dioscorus  took  a  blank  paper,  and  accompanied  by 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  attended  by  an  armed  guard, 


PEACE  JS  DECLARED   RESTORED.  445 

passed  through  the  assembly  and  had  each  bishop  in  succes- 
sion to  sign  it.  All  signed  but  the  legates  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome.  Then  the  blank  was  tilled  up  by  Dioscorus  with  a 
charge  of  heresy  against  Flavianus,  and  with  the  sentence 
which  he  had  just  pronounced  upon  Flavianus  and  Eusebius. 
When  the  sentence  was  written,  Flavianus  again  said  :  "  I  ex- 
cept against  you;  "  upon  which  Dioscorus  with  some  other 
bishops  rushed  upon  him,  and  with  Barsumas  crying  out, 
"  Strike  him  !  strike  Mm  dead  /"  they  beat  him  and  banged 
him  about,  and  then  threw  him  down  and  kicked  him  and 
tramped  upon  him  until  he  was  nearly  dead  ;  then  sent  him 
off  immediately  to  prison,  and  the  next  morning  ordered  him 
into  exile.  At  the  end  of  the  second  day's  journey  he  died  of 
the  ill  usage  he  had  received  in  the  council.20 

All  these  proceedings,  up  to  the  murder  of  Flavianus, 
were  carried  out  on  the  first  day.  The  council  continued 
three  days  longer,  during  which  Dioscorus  secured  the  con- 
demnation and  deposition  of  Domnus  of  Antioch,  and  several 
other  principal  bishops,  although  they  had  signed  his  blank 
paper,  for  having  formerly  opposed  Cyril  and  Eutyches.  He 
then  put  an  end  to  the  council,  and  returned  to  Alexandria. 

The  emperor  Theodosius,  whom  Leo  had  praised  as  hav- 
ing the  heart  of  a  priest,  issued  an  edict  in  which  he  approved 
and  confirmed  the  decrees  of  the  council,  and  commanded 
that  all  the  bishops  of  the  empire  should  immediately  sub- 
scribe to  the  Nicene  Creed.  He  involved  in  the  heresy  of 
Nestorius,  all  who  were  opposed  to  Eutyches,  and  com- 
manded that  no  adherent  of  Nestorius  or  Flavianus  should 
ever  be  raised  to  a  bishopric.  "  By  the  same  edict,  persons 
of  all  ranks  and  conditions  were  forbidden,  on  pain  of  per- 
petual banishment,  to  harbor  or  conceal  any  who  taught, 
held,  or  favored,  the  tenets  of  Nestorius,  Flavianus,  and  the 

20  Bower's  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  32  ;  Milman's  "  History  of 
Latin  Christianity,"1  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  30  ;  and  Hefele's  "History  of  the 
Church  Councils,"  sec.  178,  par.  16,  and  sec.  179. 

35 


446  THE   EUTYCIHAN  CONTROVERSY. 

deposed  bishops  ;  and  the  books,  comments,  homilies,  and 
other  works,  written  by  them  or  passing  under  their  names, 
were  ordered  to  be  publicly  burnt."  21  He  then  wrote  to  Val- 
entinian  III,  that  by  the  deposition  of  the  turbulent  prelate 
Flavianus,  ''peace  had  in  the  end  been  happily  restored  to 
all  the  churches  in  his  dominions." 

As  the  doctrine  which  the  council  had  established  was 
contrary  to  that  which  Leo  had  published  in  his  letter,  he 
denounced  the  council  as  a  "synod  of  robbers,"  refused  to 
recognize  it  at  all,  and  called  for  another  general  council. 
But  in  every  respect  this  council  was  just  as  legitimate  and 
as  orthodox  as  any  other  one  that  had  been  held  from  the 
Council  of  Nice  to  that  day.  It  was  regularly  called  ;  it  was 
regularly  opened  ;  the  proceedings  were  all  perfectly  regular; 
and  when  it  was  over,  the  proceedings  were  regularly  ap- 
proved and  confirmed  by  the  imperial  authority.  In  short, 
there  is  no  element  lacking  to  make  the  second  Council  of 
Ephesus  as  thoroughly  regular  and  orthodox  as  the  first 
Council  of  Ephesus,  which  is  held  by  the  Church  of  Rome  to 
be  entirely  orthodox,  or  even  as  orthodox  as  the  Council  of 
Nice  itself. 

21  Bovver,  Id.,  par.  34. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


THE    POPE   MADE   AUTHOR   OF   THE    FAITH. 

IEO  persisted  in  his  refusal  to  recognize  the  validity  of 
.>•  the  acts  of  the  second  Council  of  Ephesus,  and  insisted 
that  another  general  council  should  be  called.  As  it  was 
the  will  of  Leo  alone  that  made,  or  could  now  make,  the 
late  council  anything  else  than  strictly  regular  and  orthodox 
according  to  the  Catholic  system  of  discipline  and  doctrine, 
it  is  evident  that  if  another  general  council  was  called,  it 
would  have  to  be  subject  to  the  will  of  Leo,  and  its  decision 
upon  questions  of  the  faith  would  be  but  the  expression  of 
the  will  of  Leo.  This  is  precisely  what  Leo  aimed  at,  and 
nothing  less  than  this  would  satisfy  him. 

Leo  had  now  been  bishop  of  Rome  eleven  years.  He 
was  a  full-blooded  Roman  in  all  that  that  term  implies. 
"All  that  survived  of  Rome,  of  her  unbounded  ambition, 
her  inflexible  perseverance,  her  dignity  in  defeat,  her  haugh- 
tiness of  language,  her  belief  in  her  own  eternity,  and  in 
her  indefeasible  title  to  universal  dominion,  her  respect 
for  traditionary  and  written  law,  and  of  unchangeable  cus- 
tom, might  seem  concentrated  in  him  alone." — Hfilman.1 

Yet  Leo  was  not  the  first  one  in  whom  this  spirit  was 
manifested.  His  aspirations  were  but  the  culmination  of 
the  arrogance  of  the  bishopric  of  Rome  which  had  been 
constantly  growing.  To  trace  the  subtle,  silent,  often  vio- 
lent, yet  always  constant,  growth  of  this  spirit  of  supremacy 
and  encroachment  of  absolute  authority,  is  one  of  the  most 
curious  studies  in  all  history  ;  though  it  cannot  be  followed 
1 "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  2. 

[447] 


448         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF  THE  FAITH. 

in  detail  in  this  book.  Not  only  was  there  never  an  oppor- 
tunity lost,  but  opportunities  were  created,  for  the  bishop  of 
Rome  to  assert  authority  and  to  magnify  his  power.  Su- 
premacy in  discipline  and  in  jurisdiction  was  asserted  by 
Victor  and  Stephen  ;  but  it  was  not  until  the  union  of 
Church  and  State  that  the  field  was  fully  opened  to  the  arro- 
gance of  the  bishopric  of  Rome.  A  glance  at  the  successive 
bishops  from  the  union  of  Church  and  State  to  the  accession 
of  Leo,  will  give  a  better  understanding  of  the  position  and 
pretensions  of  Leo  than  could  be  obtained  in  any  other  way. 

MELCHIADES 

was  bishop  of  Rome  from  July  2,  A.  D.  311,  to  December, 
314,  and  therefore,  as  already  related,  was  in  the  papal 
chair  when  the  union  of  Churdh  and  State  was  formed,  and 
took  a  leading  part-  in  that  evil  intrigue.  And  soon  the 
bishopric  of  Rome  began  to  receive  its  reward  in  imperial 
favors.  "The  bishop  of  Rome  sits  by  the  imperial  author- 
ity at  the  head  of  a  synod  of  Italian  bishops,  to  judge  the 
disputes  of  the  African  Donatists." — MUman*  Melchiades 
was  succeeded  by  — 

SYLVESTER,    A.    D.    314-336. 

In  the  very  year  of  his  accession,  the  Council  of  Aries 
bestowed  upon  the  bishopric  of  Rome  the  distinction  and  the 
office  of  notifying  all  the  churches  of  the  proper  time  to 
celebrate  Easter.  And  in  325  the  general  Council  of  Nice 
recognized  the  bishop  of  Rome  the  first  bishop  of  the  empire. 
Under  him  the  organization  of  the  church  was  formed  upon 
the  model  of  the  organization  of  the  State.  He  was  suc- 
ceeded by  — 

MAKE,  A.  D.   336, 

whose  term  continued  only  from  January  till  October,  and 
was  therefore  so  short  that  nothing  occurred  worthy  of  rec- 
ord in  this  connection.  He  was  succeeded  by  — 

8  .W.,  book  i,  chap,  ii,  par.   1. 


PRETENSIONS  OF  THE  BISHOPS  OF  ROME.      449 

JULIUS,    OCTOBER    336-352, 

under    whom    the    Council   of    Sardica  —  347  —  made   the 
bishop  of  Rome  the  source  of  appeal,  upon  which   "single 
precedent  "  the  bishopric  of  Rome  built  "  a  universal  right." 
—  ScJiajf*    Julius  was  succeeded  by  — 
LIBEKIUS,  352-366, 

who  excommunicated  Athanasius  and  then  approved  his 
doctrine,  and  carried  on  the  contest  with  Constantius,  in 
which  he  incurred  banishment  for  the  Catholic  faith  ;  and 
then  became  Arian,  then  Serni-Arian,  and  then  Catholic 
again.  He  was  succeeded  by  — 

DAMASUS,  366-384. 

In  his  episcopate,  Yalentinian  I  enacted  a  law  making 
the  bishop  of  Rome  the  judge  of  other  bishops.  A  council  in 
Rome,  A.  D.  378,  enlarged  his  powers  of  judging,  and  peti- 
tioned the  emperor  Gratian  to  exempt  the  bishop  of  Rome 
from  all  civil  jurisdiction  except  that  of  the  emperor  alone  ; 
to  order  that  he  be  judged  by  none  except  a  council,  or  the 
emperor  direct ;  and  that  the  imperial  power  should  be  ex- 
erted to  compel  obedience  to  the  judgment  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome  concerning  other  bishops.  Gratian  granted  part  of 
their  request,  and  it  was  made  to  count  for  all.  Damasus 
was  succeeded  by  — 

SIEICIUS,  384-389, 

who  issued  the  first  decretal.  A  decretal  is  "an  answer 
sent  by  the  pope  to  applications  to  him  as  head  of  the 
church,  for  guidance  in  cases  involving  points  of  doctrine 
or  discipline."  The  directions  of  Siricius  in  this  decretal 
were  to  be  strictly  observed  under  penalty  of  excommuni- 
cation. It  was  dated  February  11,  A.  D.  385.  He  convened 
a  council  in  Rome,  which  decreed  that  "no  one  should  pre- 
sume to  ordain  a  bishop  without  the  knowledge  of  the 
apostolic  see."  -Bower.*  He  was  succeeded  by  — 

3  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  62,  par.  6. 
*  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Siricius,  par.  21. 


450         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

ANASTASIUS  i,  389-402, 

who,  though  very  zealous  to  maintain  all  that  his  predecessors 
had  asserted  or  claimed,  added  nothing  in  particular  himself. 
He  condemned  as  a  heretic,  Origen,  who  had  been  dead  one 
hundred  and  fifty  years,  and  who  is  now  a  Catholic  saint. 
He  was  succeeded  by  — 

INNOCENT  i,  402— 4:17. 

Innocent  was  an  indefatigable  disciplinarian,  and  kept  up 
a  constant  correspondence  with  all  the  West,  as  we'll  as  with 
the  principal  bishoprics  of  the  East,  establishing  rules,  dic- 
tating to  councils,  and  issuing  decretals  upon  all  the  affairs  of 
the  church.  Hitherto  the  dignity  of  the  bishopric  of  Borne 
had  been  derived  from  the  dignity  of  the  city  of  Rome.  In- 
nocent now  asserted  that  the  superior  dignity  of  the  bishop- 
ric of  Rome  was  derived  from  Peter,  whom  he  designated 
the  Prince  of  the  Apostles  ;  and  that  in  this  respect  it  took 
precedence  of  that  of  Antioch  because  that  in  Rome  Peter 
had  accomplished  what  he  had  only  begun  in  Antioch.*  He 
demanded  the  absolute  obedience  of  all  churches  in  the 
West,  because,  as  he  declared,  Peter  was  the  only  apostle  that 
ever  preached  in  the  West  ;  and  that  all  the  churches  in  the 
West  had  been  founded  by  Peter,  or  by  some  successor  of 
his.  This  was  all  a  lie,  and  he  knew  it,  but  that  made  no 
difference  to  him  ;  he  unblushingly  asserted  it,  and  then, 
upon  that,  asserted  that  "all  ecclesiastical  matters  through- 
out the  world  are,  by  divine  right,  to  be  referred  to  the 
apostolic  see,  before  they  are  finally  decided  in  the  prov- 
inces." —  Sower.5  At  the  invasion  of  Alaric  and  his 
siege  of  Rome,  Innocent  headed  an  embassy  to  the  emperor 
Honorius  to  mediate  for  a  treaty  of  peace  between  Alaric 
and  the  emperor.  "Upon  the  mind  of  Innocent  appears 
first  distinctly  to  have  dawned  the  vast  conception  of  Rome's 
universal  ecclesiastical  supremacy,  dim  as  yet,  and  shadowy, 

5/d.,  "Innocent,"  par.  8  from  the  end. 


"IRREVOCABLE"  AND  "UNIVERSAL."  4.",  1 

yet  full  and  comprehensive  in  its  outline."  - Milman*  He 
was  succeeded  by  — 

ZOSIMUS,   MARCH  18,    A.    D.    417 DEC.    26,   418, 

who  asserted  with  all  the  arrogance  of  Innocent,  all  that  In- 
nocent had  claimed.  He  not  only  boasted  with  Innocent 
that  to  him  belonged  the  power  to  judge  all  causes,  but  that 
the  judgment  "is  irrevocable  ;  "  and  accordingly  established 
the  use  of  the  dictatorial  expression,  "For  so  it  has  pleased 
the  apostolic  see,"  as  sufficient  authority  for  all  things  that 
he  might  choose  to  command.  And  upon  this  assumption, 
those  canons  of  the  Council  of  Sardica  which  made  the 
bishop  of  Rome  the  source  of  appeal,  he  passed  off  upon  the 
bishops  of  Africa  as. the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  in 
which  he  was  actually  followed  by  Leo,  and  put  tradition 
upon  a  level  with  the  Scriptures.  He  was  succeeded  by — 

BONIFACE  i,  419-422, 

who  added  nothing  to  the  power  or  authority  of  the  bishopric 
of  Rome,  but  diligently  and  "  conscientiously  "  maintained 
all  that  his  predecessors  had  asserted,  in  behalf  of  what  he 
called  "the  just  rights  of  the  see,"1  in  which  he  had  been 
placed.  He  was  succeeded  by— 

CELESTINE  i,  422-432, 

who  in  a  letter  written  A.  D.  438,  plainly  declared  :  ' '  As  I 
am  appointed  by  God  to  watch  over  his  church,  it  is  incum- 
bent upon  me  everywhere  to  root  out  evil  practices,  and  in- 
troduce good  ones  in  their  room,  for  my  pastoral  vigilance 
is'restrained  by  no  bounds,  but  extends  to  all  places  where 
Christ  is  known  and  adored."  -Sower.1  It  was  he  who 
appointed  the  terrible  Cyril  his  vicegerent  to  condemn  Nes- 
torius,  and  to  establish  the  doctrine  that  Mary  was  the 
Mother  of  God.  He  was  succeeded  by  — 

6 "  History  of  Latiu  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  i,  par.  8. 
7  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Celestine,  par.  15. 


452         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

SIXTUS  in,  432-440, 

who,  as  others  before,  added  nothing  specially  to  the  papal 
claims,  yet  yielded  not  an  iota  of  the  claims  already  made. 
He  was  succeeded  by  — 

LEO  i,    "THE  GREAT,"  A.   D.  440-461. 

Such  was  the  heritage  bequeathed  to  Leo  by  his  prede- 
cessors, and  the  arrogance  of  his  own  native  disposition, 
with  the  grand  opportunities  which  offered  during  his  long 
rule,  added  to  it  a  thousandfold.  At  the  very  moment  of 
his  election  he  was  absent  in  Gaul  on  a  mission  as  media- 
tor to  reconcile  a  dispute  between  two  of  the  principal  men 
of  the  empire.  He  succeeded  in  his  mission,  and  was  hailed 
as  "the  Angel  of  Peace,"  and  the  "Deliverer  of  the  Em- 
pire." In  a  sermon,  he  showed  what  his  ambition  em- 
braced. He  portrayed  the  powers  and  glories  of  the  former 
Rome  as  they  were  reproduced  in  Catholic  Rome.  The 
conquests  and  universal  sway  of  Heathen  Rome  were  but 
the  promise  of  the  conquests  and  universal  sway  of  Catholic 
Rome.  Romulus  and  Remus  were  but  the  precursors  of 
Peter  and  Paul.  Rome  of  former  days  had  by  her  armies 
conquered  the  earth  and  sea :  now  again,  by  the  see  of  the 
holy  blessed  Peter  as  head  of  the  world,  Rome  through  her 
divine  religion  would  dominate  the  earth.8 

In  A.  D.  445,  "at  the  avowed  instance  of  Leo"  and  at 
the  dictation,  if  not  in  the  actual  writing,  of  Leo,  Valen- 
tinian  III  issued  a  "perpetual  edict"  "commanding  all 
bishops  to  pay  an  entire  obedience  and  submission  to  the 
orders  of  the  apostolic  see  ;"  "to  observe,  as  law,  whatever 
it  should  please  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  command  ;"  "that 
the  bishop  of  Rome  had  a  right  to  command  what  he 
pleased  ;"  and  "whoever  refused  to  obey  the  citation  of  the 
Roman  pontiff  should  be  compelled  to  do  so  by  the  mod- 
8  Milman,  '•  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  2. 


LEO  DEMANDS  ANOTHER   COUNCIL.  453 

erator  of   the   province"  in  which   the   recalcitrant   bishop 
might  dwell.9 

This  made  his  authority  absolute  over  all  the  West,  and 
now  he  determined  to  extend  it  over  the  East,  and  so  make 
it  universal.  As  soon  as  he  learned  the  decision  of  the 
Council  of  Ephesus,  he  called  a  council  in  Rome,  and  by  it 
rejected  all  that  had  been  done  by  the  council  at  Ephesus, 
and  wrote  to  the  emperor,  Theodosius  II,  "entreating  him 
in  the  name  of  the  holy  Trinity,  to  declare  null  what  had 
been  done  there,"  and  set  everything  back  as  it  was  before 
that  council  was  called,  and  so  let  the  matter  remain  until  a 
general  council  could  be  held  in  Italy. 

Leo  addressed  not  the  emperor  Theodosius  alone,  to  have 
another  council  called.  He  wrote  to  Pulcheria,  appointing 
her  a  legate  of  St.  Peter,  and  entreated  her  "  to  employ  all 
her  interest  with  the  emperor  to  obtain  the  assembling  of 
an  oecumenical  council,  and  all  her  authority  to  prevent  the 
evils  that  would  be  otherwise  occasioned  by  the  war  which 
had  been  lately  declared  against  the  faith  of  the  church.  "- 
Bower. 10 

In  February  450,  the  emperor  Yalentinian  III,  with  his 
mother  Placidia  and  his  wife  Eudocia,  who  was  the  daughter 
of  Theodosius  II,  made  a  visit  to  Rome.  The  next  day 
after  their  arrival,  they  went  to  the  Church  of  St.  Peter, 
where  they  were  received  by  Leo,  who,  as  soon  as  he  met 
them,  put  on  all  the  agony  he  could,  and  with  sobs,  and 
tears,  and  sighs,  he  addressed  them  ;  but  on  account  of  his 
great  excess  of  grief,  his  words  were  so  mumbled  that  noth- 
ing could  be  made  of  them. 

Presently  the  two  women  began  to  cry.  This  somewhat 
relieved  the  stress  upon  Leo,  so  that  with  much  eloquence, 
he  represented  the  great  danger  that  threatened  the  church. 
Then  he  mustered  up  his  tears  again,  and  mixed  them  with 

'/<?.,  par.  16  ;  and  Bower,  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  8. 
10  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  85. 


454         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAlTH. 

more  sighs  and  sobs,  and  begged  the  emperor  and  empress, 
by  the  apostle  Peter  to  whom  they  were  about  to  pay  their 
respects,  by  their  own  salvation  and  by  the  salvation  of 
Theodosius,  to  write  to  the  emperor,  and  spare  no  pains  to 
persuade  him  to  nullify  the  proceedings  of  the  second  Coun- 
cil of  Ephesus,  and  call  another  general  council,  this  time 
in  Italy. 

As  soon  as  it  was  learned  in  the  East  what  strenuous 
efforts  Leo  was  making  to  have  another  general  council 
called,  many  of  the  bishops  who  had  condemned  Flavianus 
began  to  make  overtures  to  the  party  of  Leo,  so  that  if  an- 
other council  should  be  called,  they  might  escape  condem- 
nation. Dioscorus  learning  this,  called  a  synod  of  ten 
bishops  in  Alexandria,  and  solemnly  excommunicated  Leo, 
bishop  of  Rome,  for  presuming  to  judge  anew,  and  annul 
what  had  already  been  judged  and  finally  determined  by  a 
general  council. 

Leo  finally  sent  four  legates  to  the  court  of  Theodosius, 
to  urge  upon  him  the  necessity  of  another  general  council, 
but  before  they  reached  Constantinople,  Theodosius  was 
dead  ;  and  having  left  no  heir  to  his  throne,  Pulcheria,  Leo's 
legate,  became  empress.  As  there  was  no  precedent  in  Ro- 
man history  to  sanction  the  rule  of  a  woman  alone,  she  mar- 
ried a  senator  by  the  name  of  Marcian,  and  invested  him 
with  the  imperial  robes,  while  she  retained  and  exercised 
the  imperial  authority.  The  first  thing  they  did  was  to  burn 
Chrysaphius.  The  new  authority  received  Leo's  legates 
with  great  respect,  and  returned  answer  that  they  had  noth- 
ing so  much  at  heart  as  the  unity  of  the  church  and  the  ex- 
tirpation of  heresies,  and  that  therefore  they  would  call  a 
general  council.  Not  long  afterward  they  wrote  to  Leo,  in- 
viting him  to  assist  in  person  at  the  proposed  council. 

No  sooner  was  it  known  that  Theodosius  was  dead,  and 
Pulcheria  and  Marcian  in  power,  than  the  bishops  who  had 
indorsed  and  praised  Eutyches,  changed  their  opinions  and 
condemned  him  and  all  who  held  with  him.  Anatolius,  an 


TEE   GENERAL   COUNCIL   OF  CHALCEDON.          455 

ardent  defender  of  Eutyches,  who  had  succeeded  Flavianus 
as  archbishop  of  Constantinople,  and  had  been  ordained  by 
Dioscorus  himself,  "assembled  in  great  haste  all  the  bishops, 
abbots,  presbyters,  and  deacons,  who  were  then  in  Constan- 
tinople, and  in  their  presence  not  only  received  and  signed 
the  famous  letter  of  Leo  to  Flavianus,  concerning  the  incar- 
nation, but  at  the  same  time  anathematized  Nestorius  and 
Eutyches,  their  doctrine,  and  all  their  followers,  declaring 
that  he  professed  no  other  faith  but  what  was  held  and  pro- 
fessed by  the  Roman  Church  and  by  Leo."  -Bower.11  The 
example  of  Anatolius  was  followed  by  other  bishops  who  had 
favored  Eutyches,  and  by  most  of  those  who  had  acted  in 
the  late  council,  "and  nothing  was  heard  but  anathemas 
against  Eutyches,  whom  most  of  those  who  uttered  them, 
had  but  a  few  months  before,  honored  as  a  new  apostle,  and 
as  the  true  interpreter  of  the  doctrine  of  the  church  and  the 
Fathers."—  Bower.™ 

By  an  imperial  message  dated  May  17,  A.  D.  451,  a  gen- 
eral council  was  summoned  to  meet  at  Nice  in  Bithynia,  the 
first  of  September.  The  council  met  there  accordingly,  but 
an  invasion  of  the  Huns  from  Illyricum  made  it  necessary 
for  Marcian  to  remain  in  the  capital ;  and  therefore  the 
council  was  removed  from  Nice  to  Chalcedon.  Accord- 
ingly at  Chalcedon  there  assembled  the  largest  council  ever 
yet  held,  the  number  of  bishops  being  six  hundred  and  thirty. 

Marcian,  not  being  able  to  be  present  at  the  opening,  ap- 
pointed six  of  the  chief  officers  of  the  empire,  and  fourteen 
men  of  the  Senate  as  commissioners  to  represent  him  at  the 
council.  Leo's  legates  presided ;  their  names  were  Pas- 
chasinus,  Lucentius,  and  Boniface. 

FIRST  SESSION,   OCTOBER  8. 

When  all  the  bishops  were  seated,  Leo's  legates  arose, 
and  advanced  to  the  middle  of  the  assembly,  and  Paschasinus. 
holding  a  paper  in  his  hand,  said  :  — 

11  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  40.  ia  Id. 


456          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF  THE  FAITH. 

"  We  have  here  an  order  from  the  most  blessed  and  apostolic  pope, 
of  the  city  of  Rome,  which  is  the  head  of  all  churches,  by  which  his 
apostleship  has  been  pleased  to  command  that  Dioscorus,  bishop  of 
Alexandria,  should  not  be  allowed  to  sit  in  the  council.  Let  him  there- 
fore be  ordered  to  withdraw,  else  we  must  withdraw." 

The  commissioners. — "What  have  you  to  object  against 
Dioscorus  in  particular  ?  " 

No  answer.     The  question  was  repeated. 

Lacentius. — "  lie  must  be  called  to  account  for  the  judg- 
ment he  gave  at  Ephesus,  where  he  presumed  to  assemble  a 
council  without  the  consent  of  the  apostolic  see,  which  has 
never  been  thought  lawful,  which  has  never  been  done  ;  as 
he  is  therefore  to  be  judged,  he  ought  not  to  sit  as  a  judge." 

Tlie  commissioners. — "Neither  ought  you  to  sit  as  a 
judge,  since  you  take  it  upon  you  to  act  as  a  party.  How- 
ever, let  us  know  what  crime  you  lay  to  the  charge  of  Dios- 
corus, for  it  is  not  agreeable  to  justice  or  reason,  that  he 
alone  should  be  charged  with  a  crime  of  which  many  others 
are  no  less  guilty  than  he." 

T/ie  legates. — "Leo  will  by  no  means  suffer  Dioscorus 
to  sit  or  act  in  this  assembly  as  a  judge,  and  if  he  does,  then 
we  must  withdraw,  agreeably  to  our  instructions."13 

The  commissioners  finding  the  legates  immovable,  yielded 
at  last,  and  ordered  Dioscorus  to  leave  his  seat,  and  put 
himself  in  the  midst  of  the  assembly,  in  the  place  of  one 
accused. 

Then  Eusebius  of  Dorylseum,  the  original  accuser  of 
Eutyches,  stepped  forward  as  the  accuser  of  Dioscorus,  and 
declared:  "I  have  been  wronged  by  Dioscorus  ;  the  faith 
has  been  wronged  ;  the  bishop  Flavian  was  murdered,  and, 
together  with  myself,  unjustly  deposed  by  him.  Give  di- 
rections that  my  petition  be  read."  This  petition  was  a 
memorial  to  the  emperors,  and  was  to  the  effect  that  at  the 
late  council  at  Ephesus,  Dioscorus  "having  gathered  a  dis- 
orderly rabble,  and  procured  an  overbearing  influence  by 

13 Bower's  "History  of  the  Popes,''  Loo,  par.  43. 


"A   FRIGHTFUL   STORM."  457 

bribes,  made  havoc,  as  far  as  lay  in  his  power,  of  the  pious 
religion  of  the  orthodox,  and  established  the  erroneous  doc- 
trine of  Eutyches  the  monk,  which  had  from  the  first  been 
repudiated  by  the  holy  Fathers  ;  "  that  the  emperors  should 
therefore  command  Dioscorus  to  answer  the  accusation 
which  he  now  made  ;  and  that  the  acts  of  the  late  council  of 
Ephesus  should  be  read  in  the  present  council,  because  from 
these  he  could  show  that  Dioscorus  was  "estranged  from 
the  orthodox  faith,  that  he  strengthened  a  heresy  utterly 
impious,"  and  that  he  had  "wrongfully  deposed"  and 
"  cruelly  outraged  "  him.14 

When  the  reading  of  the  memorial  was  ended,  it  was  de- 
cided that  not  only  the  acts  of  the  late  council  at  Ephesus, 
but  those  of  the  original  synod  at  Constantinople  and  all  the 
steps  between,  should  be  read. 

The  late  council  at  Ephesus  had  excommunicated  Theo- 
doret,  bishop  of  Cyrus.  Theodoret  had  appealed  to  Leo. 
Leo  had  re-instated  him,  and  the  emperor  Marcian  had  spe- 
cially summoned  him  to  this  council.  Theodoret  had  ar- 
rived, and  at  this  point  in  the  proceedings,  the  imperial 
commissioners  directed  that  he  should  be  admitted  to  the 
council.  "The  actual  introduction  of  Theodoret  caused  a 
frightful  storm."  -  Hefele™  A  faint  estimate  of  this  fright- 
ful storm  may  be  formed  from  the  following  account  of  it, 
which  is  copied  bodily  from  the  report  of  the  council :  — 

"And  when  the  most  reverend  bishop  Theodoret  entered, 
the  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  Illyria,  and  Pales- 
tine [the  party  of  Dioscorus]  shouted  out,  '  Mercy  upon  us ! 
the  faith  is  destroyed.  The  canons  of  the  church  excommuni- 
cate him.  Turn  him  out  !  turn  out  the  teacher  of  Nestorius.' 

"On  the  other  hand,  the  most  reverend  the  bishops  of 
the  East,  of  Thrace,  of  Pontus,  and  of  Asia,  shouted  out, 


14  Evagrius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  ii,  chap.  iv. 

15  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  189,  par.  4.     This  is  the  Theodo- 
ret whose  "Ecclesiastical  History"  has  been  several  times  referred  to  in  thig 
book. 


458          TUH  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR    OF   THE  FAITH. 

'  We  were  compelled  [at  the  former  council]  to  subscribe  our 
names  to  blank  papers;  we  were  scourged  into  submission. 
Turn  out  the  Manichceans !  Turn  out  the  enemies  of  Flavian  ; 
turn  out  the  adversaries  of  the  faith  ! ' 

"Dioscorus,  the  most  reverend  bishop  of  Alexandria, 
said,  '  Why  is  Cyril  to  be  turned  out  ?  It  is  he  whom  Theo- 
doret  has  condemned.' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  the  East  shouted  out, 
'  Turn  out  the  murderer  Dioscorus.  Who  knoivs  not  the  deeds 
of  Dioscorus  1 ' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  Illyria,  and 
Palestine  shouted  out,  'Long  life  to  the  empress!' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  the  East  shouted 
out,  '  Turn  out  the  murderers ! ' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  Egypt  shouted  out, 
'  The  empress  turned  out  Nestorius  ;  long  life  to  the  Catliolic 
empress  !  The  orthodox  synod  refuses  to  admit  Theodoret.' " 

Here  there  was  a  "momentary"  lull  in  the  storm,  of 
which  Theodoret  instantly  took  advantage,  and  stepped  for- 
ward to  the  commissioners  with  "  a  petition  to  the  emper- 
ors," which  was  really  a  complaint  against  Dioscorus,  and 
asked  that  it  be  read.  The  commissioners  said  that  the 
regular  business  should  be  proceeded  with,  but  that  Theodo- 
ret should  be  admitted  to  a  seat  in  the  council,  because  the 
bishop  of  Antioch  had  vouched  for  his  orthodoxy.  Then 
the  storm  again  raged. 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  the  East  shouted  out, 
'  lie  is  worthy  —  vjorthy  ! ' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  Egypt  shouted  out, 
'  Do  n't  call  him  bishop,  he  is  no  bishop.  Turn  out  the  fighter 
against  God  ;  turn  out  the  Jew  ! ' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  the  East  shouted 
out,  '  The  orthodox  for  the  synod  !  Turn  out  the  rebels  ;  turn 
out  the  murderers  ! ' 

"The  most  reverend  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  'Turn  out 
the  enemy  of  God.  Turn  out  the  defamer  of  Christ.  Long 


~ 
Q 
W 
H 

•sfl 


CONDEMNATION  OF  DIOSCORUS.  459 

life  to  the  empress  !  Long  life  to  the  emperor  !  Long  life  to 
the  Catholic  emperor!  Theodoret  condemned  Cyril.  If  we 
receive  Theodoret,  we  excommunicate  Cyril.' " 

At  this  stage  the  commissioners  were  enabled  by  a  special 
exertion  of  their  authority,  to  allay  the  storm.  They  plainly 
told  the  loud-mouthed  bishops,  "  Such  vulgar  shouts  are  not 
becoming  in  bishops,  and  can  do  no  good  to  either  party."  17 

When  the  tumult  had  been  subdued,  the  council  pro- 
ceeded to  business.  First  there  were  read  all  the  proceedings 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Synod  of  Constantinople  against 
Eutyches  clear  down  to  the  end  of  the  late  Council  of  Ephe- 
sus  ;  during  which  there  was  much  shouting  and  counter- 
shouting  after  the  manner  of  that  over  the  introduction  of 
Theodoret,  but  which  need  not  be  repeated. 

The  first  act  of  the  council  after  the  reading  of  the  fore- 
going minutes,  was  to  annul  the  sentence  which  Dioscorus 
had  pronounced  against  Flavianus  and  Eusebius.  "Many  of 
the  bishops  expressed  their  penitence  at  their  concurrence  in 
these  acts  ;  some  saying  that  they  were  compelled  by  force 
to  subscribe  —  others  to  subscribe  a  blank  paper." — Milman™ 
Then  a  resolution  was  framed  charging  Dioscorus  with  hav- 
ing approved  the  doctrine  of  one  nature  in  Christ  ;  with 
having  condemned  the  doctrine  of  two  natures,  and  having 
opposed  Flavianus  in  maintaining  it ;  and  with  having  forced 
all  the  bishops  at  Ephesus  to  sign  the  sentence  which  he  had 
pronounced. 

Dioscorus  was  not  afraid  of  anything,  not  even  the  terrors 
of  an  orthodox  church  council,  and  without  the  least  sign  of 
intimidation  or  fear,  he  boldly  confronted  the  whole  host  of 
his  adversaries.  In  answer  to  their  charges  — 

Dioscorus  said. — "I  have  condemned,  still  do,  and  al- 
ways will,  condemn,  the  doctrine  of  two  natures  in  Christ, 

16  Quoted  by  Stanley,  "  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  ii,  par.  8 
from  the  end. 

17  Hefele,  "  History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  189,  par.  4. 

18  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  38. 

36 


460          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

and  all  who  maintain  it.  I  hold  no  other  doctrine  but  what 
I  have  learned  of  the  Fathers,  especially  Athanasius,  Nazian- 
zen,  and  Cyril.  I  have  chosen  rather  to  condemn  Flavianus 
than  them.  Those  who  do  not  like  my  doctrine  may  use  me 
as  they  please,  now  they  are  uppermost  and  have  the  power 
in  their  hands  ;  but  in  what  manner  soever  they  think  fit  to 
use  me,  I  am  unalterably  determined,  my  soul  being  at 
stake,  to  live  and  die  in  the  faith  which  I  have  hitherto  pro- 
fessed. As  to  my  having  forced  the  bishops  to  sign  the 
condemnation  of  Flavianus,  I  answer  that  the  constancy  of 
every  Christian,  and  much  more  of  a  bishop,  ought  to  be 
proof  against  all  kinds  of  violence  and  death  itself.  The 
charge  brought  by  Eusebius  lays  heavier  against  them  than 
it  does  against  me,  and  therefore  it  is  incumbent  upon  them 
to  answer  that,  as  they  are  the  more  guilty." — JBow&r.19 

Night  had  now  come.  Dioscorus  demanded  an  adjourn- 
ment. It  was  refused.  Torches  were  brought  in.  The 
night  was  made  hideous  by  the  wild  cries  of  acclamation  to 
the  emperor  and  the  Senate,  of  appeals  to  God  and  curses 
upon  Dioscorus.  When  the  resolution  was  finally  put  upon 
its  passage,  it  was  announced  as  follows  by  — 

TJte  imperial  commissioners. — "As  it  has  now  been 
shown  by  the  reading  of  the  acts  and  by  the  avowal  of  many 
bishops  who  confess  that  they  fell  into  error  at  Ephesus, 
that  Flavianus  and  others  were  unjustly  deposed,  it  seems 
right  that,  if  it  so  pleases  the  emperor,  the  same  punishment 
should  be  inflicted  upon  the  heads  of  the  previous  synod, 
Dioscorus  of  Alexandria,  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem,  Thalassius 
of  Caesarea,  Eusebius  of  Ancyra,  Eustathius  of  Berytus,  and 
Basil  of  Seleucia,  and  that  their  deposition  from  the  episco- 
pal dignity  should  be  pronounced  by  the  council." 

The  orientals.  —  "That  is  quite  right." 

Many  of  the  party  of  Dioscorus  now  abandoned  him 
arid  his  cause,  and  went  over  to  the  other  side,  exclaim- 

19  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  45. 


LEO'S  LETTER    THE   TEST.  461 

ing  :  "  We  have  all  erred,  we  all  ask  for  pardon."  Upon 
this  there  was  an  almost  unanimous  demand  that  only 
Dioscorus  should  be  deposed. 

Dioscorus. —  "They  are  condemning  not  me  alone,  but 
Athanasius  and  Cyril.  They  forbid  us  to  assert  the  two 
natures  after  the  incarnation." 

Tlie  orientals,  and  other  opponents  of  Dioscorus,  all 
together. —  "Many  years  to  the  Senate!  holy  God,  holy 
Almighty,  holy  Immortal,  have  mercy  upon  us  !  Many 
years  to  the  emperors  !  The  impious  must  ever  be  subdued  ! 
Dioscorus  the  murderer,  Christ  has  deposed !  This  is  a 
righteous  judgment,  a  righteous  senate,  a  righteous  council." 

Amid  such  cries  as  these,  and,  "  Christ  has  deposed 
Dioscorus,  Christ  has  deposed  the  murderer,  God  has 
avenged  his  martyrs,"  the  resolution  was  adopted.  Then 
the  council  adjourned.20 

THE    SECOND    SESSION,     OCTOBER    10. 

As  soon  as  the  council  had  been  opened,  the  direction 
was  given  by  — 

27te  imperial  commissioners. —  "Let  the  synod  now  de- 
clare what  -the  true  faith'  is,  so  that  the  erring  may  be 
brought  back  to  the  right  way." 

The  bishops,  protesting. —  "No  one  can  venture  to  draw 
up  a  new  formula  of  the  faith,  but  that  which  has  already 
been  laid  down  by  the  Fathers  [at  Nice,  Constantinople,  and 
the  first  of  Ephesus]  is  to  be  held  fast.  This  must  not  be 
departed  from;" 


20IIefele's  "History  of  the  Church  Councils,"  sec.  183,  last  three  par. 
Milman's  "History  of  Latiu  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  38.  In  the 
rest  of  this  chapter,  I  follow  so  closely  and  so  fully,  Hefele's  "  History  of  the 
Church  Councils,"  that  I  shall  not  attempt  to  cite  particular  references.  The 
only  references  that  I  shall  make  are  to  passages  not  derived  from  Hefele's 
account.  In  following  Hefele,  however,  I  have  maintained  the  uniformity  of 
the  narrative  by  turning  indirect  quotations  into  direct,  and  so  have  preserved 
as  far  as  possible  the  personality  of  the  speakers. 


462          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

Cecropius,  bishop  of  Sevastopol. —  "On  the  Eutychian 
question  a  test  has  already  been  given  by  the  Roman 
archbisfiop,  which  we  [that  is,  he  and  his  nearest  colleagues] 
have  all  signed." 

All  the  bishops,  with  acclamation. —  "That  we  also  say, 
the  explanation  already  given  by  Leo  suffices;  another  dec- 
laration of  the  faith  must  not  be  put  forth." 

Tfie  imperial  commissioners. —  ''Let  all  the  patriarchs 
[the  chief  bishops]  come  together,  along  with  one  or  two 
bishops  of  their  province,  and  take  common  counsel  respect- 
ing the  faith,  and  communicate  the  result,  so  that,  by  its 
universal  acceptance,  every  doubt  in  regard  to  the  faith  may 
be  removed,  or  if  any  believe  otherwise,  which  we  do  not 
expect,  these  may  immediately  be  made  manifest." 

The  bishops. —  "A  written  declaration  of  faith  we  do  not 
bring  forward.  This  is  contrary  to  the  rule  "  [referring  to 
the  command  of  the  first  Council  of  Ephesus]. 

Florentius,  bishop  of  Sardes. —  "As  those  who  have 
been  taught  to  follow  the  Nicene  Synod,  and  also  the  regu- 
larly and  piously  assembled  synod  at  Ephesus,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  faith  of  the  holy  Fathers  Cyril  and  Celestine, 
and  also  with  the  letter  of  the  most  holy  Leo,  cannot  possi- 
bly draw  up  at'orice  a  formula  of  the  faith,  we  therefore  ask 
for  a  longer  delay  ;  but  I,  for  my  part,  believe  that  the  let- 
ter of  Leo  is  sufficient." 

Cecropius. —  "  Let  the  formulas  be  read  in  which  the  true 
faith  has  already  been  set  forth." 

This  suggestion  was  adopted.  First  the  Nicene  Creed, 
with  its  curse  against  the  Arian  heresy,  was  read,  at  the 
close  of  which, — 

Tlie  bishops,  unanimously. —  "That  is  the  orthodox  faith, 
that  we  all  believe,  into  that  we  were  baptized,  into  that 
we  also  baptize  ;  thus  Cyril  taught,  thus  believes  Pope 
Leo." 

Next  was  read  the  Creed  of  Constantinople,  and  with 
similar  acclamations  it  was  unanimously  indorsed.  Then 


LEO'S  LETTER  APPROVED.  463 

were  read  the  two  letters  which  Cyril  had  written,  and  which 
were  a  part  of  the  record  of  the  inquisition  upon  Eutyches. 
Lastly  there  was  read  the  letter  of  Leo.  When  Leo's  letter 
was  read,  it  was  cheered  to  the  echo,  and  again  roared  — 

TJie  bishops. — "It  is  the  belief  of  the  Fathers  —  of  the 
apostles  —  so  believe  we  all !  Accursed  be  he  that  admits 
not  that  Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo  !  Leo  has 
taught  what  is  righteous  and  true,  and  so  taught  Cyril. 
Eternal  be  the  memory  of  Cyril !  Why  was  not  this  read  at 
Ephesus  ?  It  was  suppressed  by  Dioscorus  !  " 

The  bishops  of  Illyricum  and  Palestine,  however,  said 
that  there  were  some  passages — three,  it  proved  —  in  the 
letter  of  Leo  of  which  they  had  some  doubts.  The  truth  of 
those  passages  wras  confirmed  by  statements  which  Cyril  had 
made  to  the  same  eft'ect. 

The  imperial  commissioners.  —  ' '  Has  any  one  still  a 
doubt  ? " 

The  bishops,  l)y  acclamation. — "No  one  doubts." 

Still  there  was  one  bishop  who  hesitated,  and  requested 
that  there  might  be  a  few  days'  delay,  that  the  question 
might  be  quietly  considered  and  settled  ;  and  as  the  letter 
of  Leo  had  been  read,  that  they  might  have  a  copy  of  the 
letter  of  Cyril  to  Nestorius,  that  they  might  examine  them 
together. 

TJie  council. — "If  we  are  to  have  delay,  we  must  request 
that  all  the  bishops  in  common  shall  take  part  in  the  desired 
consultation." 

TJie  commissioners. — "The  assembly  is  put  off  for  five 
days,  and  the  bishops  shall,  during  that  time,  meet  with 
Anatolius  of  Constantinople,  and  take  counsel  together  con- 
cerning the  faith,  so  that  the  doubting  may  be  instructed." 

As  the  council  was  about  to  be  dismissed,  some  bishops 
entered  a  request  that  the  bishops  who  had  taken  a  leading 
part  in  the  late  council  of  Ephesus,  should  be  forgiven  !  " 

TJie  petitioning  bishops. — "We  petition  for  the  Fathers 
that  they  may  be  allowed  again  to  enter  the  synod.  The 


464         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF  THE  FAITH. 

emperor  and  the  empress  should  hear  of  this  petition.     "We 

have  all  erred  ;  let  all  be  forgiven  !  " 

Upon  this  "a  great  commotion  again  arose,  similar  to 

that  at  the  beginning  of  the  council  over  the  introduction  of 

Theodoret." 

The  clergy  of  Constantinople  shouted. — "  Only  a  few  cry 

for  this,  the  synod  itself  says  not  a  syllable." 

The  orientals  cried  out. — "Exile  to  the  Egyptian  !  " 

The  Illyrians. — "We  beseech  you,  pardon  all  !  " 

The  orientals. — "Exile  to  the  Egyptian  !  " 

The  Illyrians. — "We  have  all  erred;  have  mercy  on  us 

all !     These  words  to  the  orthodox  emperor  !     The  churches 

are  rent  in  pieces." 

The  clergy   of   Constantinople. —  "To  exile  with   Dios- 

corus ;    God  has  rejected  him.     Whoever   has   communion 

with  him  is  a  Jew." 

In  the  midst  of  this  uproar,  the  imperial  commissioners 

put  an  end  to  the  session.     The  recess  continued  only  two 

days  instead  of  five,  for  — 

THE    THIKD    SESSION    WAS    HELD    OCTOBER    13. 

The  first  step  taken  at  this  session  was  by  Eusebius  of 
Dorylaem,  who  proudly  stepped  forward  to  secure  by  the 
council  his  vindication  as  the  champion  of  orthodoxy.  He 
presented  a  petition  to  the  council  in  which,  after  repeating 
his  accusation  against  Dioscorus,  he  said  :  — 

"I  therefore  pray  that  you  will  have  pity  upon  me,  and  decree  that 
all  which  was  done  against  me  be  declared  null,  and  do  me  no  harm, 
but  that  I  be  again  restored  to  my  spiritual  dignity.  At  the  same  time 
anathematize  his  evil  doctrine,  and  punish  him  for  his  insolence  accord- 
ing to  his  deserts." 

Following  this,  Dioscorus  was  charged  with  enormous 
crimes,  with  lewdness  and  debauchery  to  the  great  scandal 
of  his  flock  ;  with  styling  himself  the  king  of  Egypt,  and 
attempting  to  usurp  the  sovereignty.  Dioscorus  was  not 


LEO'S  LETTER  "THE  TRUE  FAITH."  465 

present,  and  after  being  summoned  three  times  without 
appearing,  Leo's  legates  gave  a  recapitulation  of  the  crimes 
charged  against  him,  and  then  pronounced  the  following 
sentence  :  — 

"Leo,  archbishop  of  the  great  and  ancient  Rome,  by  us  and  the 
present  synod,  with  the  authority  of  St.  Peter,  on  whom  the  Catholic 
Church  and  orthodox  faith  are  founded,  divests  Dioscorus  of  the 
episcopal  dignity,  and  declares  him  henceforth  incapable  of  exercising 
any  sacerdotal  or  episcopal  functions."21 

THE  FOURTH  SESSION,  OCTOBER  17. 

At  this  session,  the  discussion  of  the  faith  was  resumed. 
First,  there  was  read  the  act  of  the  second  session,  ordering 
a  recess  of  five  days  for  the  consideration  of  the  faith. 

Tlie  commissioners. —  "What  has  the  reverend  synod 
now  decreed  concerning  the  faith  ?  " 

The  papal  legate,  Paschasinus. —  "The  holy  synod  holds 
fast  the  rule  of  faith  which  was  ratified  by  the  Fathers  at 
Nicsea  and  by  those  at  Constantinople.  Moreover,  in  the 
second  place,  it  acknowledges  that  exposition  of  this  creed 
which  was  given  by  Cyril  at  Ephesus.  In  the  third  place, 
the  letter  of  the  most  holy  man  Leo,  archbishop  of  all 
churches,  who  condemned  the  heresy  of  Nestorius  and 
Eutyches,  shows  quite  clearly  what  is  the  true  faith,  and  this 
faith  the  synod  also  holds,  and  allows  nothing  to  he  added  to 
it  or  taken  from  it." 

The  "bishops  all  together. —  "We  also  all  believe  thus, 
into  that  we  were  baptized,  into  that  we  baptize,  thus  we 
believe." 

In  the  midst  of  the  assembly  was  the  throne  upon  which 
lay  the  Gospels.  The  imperial  commissioners  now  required 
that  all  the  bishops  should  swear  by  the  Gospels  whether  or 
not  they  agreed  with  the  faith  expressed  in  the  creeds  of 
Nice  and  Constantinople,  and  in  Leo's  letter.  The  first  to 

21  Bower,  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  par.  40. 


466          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR    OF   THE  FAITH. 

swear  was  Anatolius,  archbisliop  of  Constantinople,  next, 
the  three  legates  of  Leo,  and  after  them,  one  by  one,  others 
came,  until  one  hundred  and  sixty-one  votes  had  been  thus 
taken  ;  whereupon  the  imperial  commissioners  asked  the  re- 
maining bishops  to  give  their  votes  all  at  once. 

The  Mshops,  unanimously  and  vociferously . —  "  We  are  all 
agreed,  we  all  believe  thus  ;  he  who  agrees,  belongs  to 
the  synod  !  Many  years  to  the  emperors,  many  years  -to 
the  empress  !  Even  the  five  bishops  [who  had  been  deposed 
with  Dioscorus  ]  have  subscribed,  and  believe  as  Leo  does! 
They  also  belong  to  the  synod  !  '' 

The  imperial  commissioners  and  others. —  "We  have 
written  on  their  [  the  five  bishops'  ]  account  to  the  emperor, 
and  await  his  commands.  You,  however,  are  responsible  to 
God  for  these  five  for  whom  you  intercede,  and  for  all  the 
proceedings  of  this  synod." 

The  bishops. —  ''God  has  deposed  Dioscorus  ;  Diosco- 
rus is  rightly  condemned  ;  Christ  has  deposed  him." 

After  this  the  council  waited  to  receive  word  from  the 
emperor  respecting  the  five  bishops.  After  several  hours 
the  message  came,  saying  that  the  council  itself  should  decide 
as  to  their  admission.  As  the  council  was  already  agreed 
upon  it,  and  had  called  for  it,  the  five  bishops  were  called  in 
at  once.  As  they  came  in  and  took  their  places,  again  cried 
loudly  — 

The  T)ixhops. —  "  God  has  done  this  !  Many  years  to  the 
emperors,  to  the  Senate,  to  the  commissioners  !  The  union 
is  complete,  and  peace  given  to  the  churches  !  " 

The  commissioners  next  announced  that  the  day  before, 
a  number  of  Egyptian  bishops  had  handed  in  a  confession 
of  faith  to  the  emperor,  who  wished  that  it  should  be  read 
to  the  council.  The  bishops  were  called  in  and  took  their 
places,  and  their  confession  was  read.  The  confession  was 
signed  by  thirteen  bishops,  but  it  was  presented  in  the 
name  of  "  all  the  bishops  of  Egypt."  It  declared  that  they 


UNITY  OF   THE   COUNCIL  IS  CREATED.  407 

agreed  with  the  orthodox  faith  and  cursed  all  heresy,  partic- 
ularly that  of  Arms,  and  a  number  of  others,  but  did  not 
name  Eutyches*  amongst  the  heretics.  As  soon  as  this  was 
noticed,  the  council  accused  the  Egyptians  of  dishonesty. 
Leo's  legates  demanded  whether  or  not  they  would  agree 
with  the  letter  of  Leo,  and  pronounce  a  curse  on  Eutyches. 

The  Egyptians.  —  "If  any  one  teaches  differently  from 
what  we  have  indicated,  whether  it  be  Eutyches,  or  whoever 
it  be,  let  him  be  anathema.  As  to  the  letter  of  Leo,  howr- 
ever,  we  cannot  express  ourselves,  for  you  all  know  that 
in  accordance  with  the  prescription  of  the  Nicene  Council, 
we  are  united  with  the  archbishop  of  Alexandria,  and  there- 
fore must  await  his  judgment  in  this  matter." 

This  caused  such  an  outcry  in  the  council  against  them, 
that  the  thirteen  yielded  so  far  as  to  pronounce  openly  and 
positively  a  curse  upon  Eutyches.  Again  the  legates  called 
upon  them  to  subscribe  to  the  letter  of  Leo. 

TJie  Egyptians. — "Without  the  consent  of  our  arch- 
bishop we  cannot  subscribe." 

Acacius,  bishop  of  Ariarathia.  —  "It  is  inadmissible  to 
allow  more  weight  to  one  single  person  wlio  is  to  hold  the 
bishopric  of  Alexandria,  than  to  the  whole  synod.  The 
Egyptians  only  wish  to  throw  everything  into  confusion 
here  as  at  Ephesus.  They  must  subscribe  Leo's  letter  or  be 
excommunicated. " 

The  Egyptians. — "In  comparison  with  the  great  num- 
ber of  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  there  are  only  a  few  of  us  pres- 
ent, and  we  have  no  right  to  act  in  their  name,  to  do  what 
is  here  required.  We  therefore  pray  for  mercy,  and  that  we 
may  be  allowed  to  follow  our  archbishop.  Otherwise  all 
the  provinces  of  Egypt  will  rise  up  against  us. " 

Cecropius  of  Sebastopol. —  [Again  reproaching  them  with 
heresy]  "  It  is  from  yourselves  alone  that  assent  is  demanded 
to  the  letter  of  Leo,  and  not  in  the  name  of  the  rest  of  the 
Egyptian  bishops." 


468          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR    OF   THE  FAITH. 

TJie  Egyptians. — "Wo  can  no  longer  live  at  home  if  we 
do  this." 

Leo's  legate,  Lucentius. — "Ten  individual  men  can  oc- 
casion no  prejudice  to  a  synod  of  six  hundred  bishops  and 
to  the  Catholic  faith." 

Tlie  Egyptians. — "  We  shall  be  killed,  we  shall  be  killed, 
if  we  do  it.  We  will  rather  be  made  away  with  here  by  you 
than  there.  Let  an  archbishop  for  Egypt  be  here  appointed, 
and  then  we  will  subscribe  and  assent.  Have  mercy  on  our 
gray  hairs  !  Anatolius  of  Constantinople  knows  that  in  Egypt 
all  the  bishops  must  obey  the  archbishop  of  Alexandria. 
Have  pity  upon  us  ;  we  would  rather  die  by  the  hands  of 
the  emperor,  and  by  yours  than  at  home.  Take  our  bishop- 
rics if  you  will,  elect  an  archbishop  of  Alexandria ;  we  do 
not  object." 

Many  Mshops.  — "  The  Egyptians  are  heretics  ;  they  must 
subscribe  the  condemnation  of  Dioscorus." 

Tfie  imperial  commissioners. — "Let  them  remain  at  Con- 
stantinople until  an  archbishop  is  elected  for  Alexandria." 

The  legate,  Paschasinn*. —  [Agreeing]  "They  must 
give  security  not  to  leave  Constantinople  in  the  mean- 
time." 

During  the  rest  of  the  session  matters  were  discussed 
which  had  no  direct  bearing  upon  the  establishment  of  the 
faith. 

THE  FIFTH  SESSION,  OCTOBER  22. 

The  object  of  this  session  was  the  establishment  of  the 
faith  ;  and  the  object  \vas  accomplished.  The  first  thing 
was  the  reading  of  a  form  of  doctrine  which,  according  to 
arrangement  made  in  the  second  session,  had  been  framed, 
and  also  the  day  before  had  been  "unanimously  approved." 
As  soon  as  it  was  read,  however,  there  was  an  objection 
made  against  it. 

John,  bishop  of  Germanicia. —  "This  formula  is  not 
good  ;  it  must  be  improved." 


LEO'S  DOCTRINE  SEALS   THE   CREED.  469 

Anatolius. —  "Did  it  not  yesterday  give  universal" 
satisfaction  \  " 

The  bishops  in  acclamation. —  "It  is  excellent,  and  con- 
tains the  Catholic  faith.  Away  with  the  Nestorians  ! 
The  expression  '  Thcotokos '  [  Mother  of  God  ]  must  be  re- 
ceived into  the  creed." 

Leo's  legates. —  "If  the  letter  of  Leo  is  not  agreed  to, 
we  demand  our  papers,  so  that  we  may  return  home,  and 
that  a  synod  may  be  held  in  the  West."_ 

The  imperial  commissioners  then  suggested  that  a  com- 
mission composed  of  six  bishops  from  the  East,  three  from 
Asia,  three  from  Illyria,  three  from  Pontus,  and  three  from 
Thrace,  with  the  archbishop  of  Constantinople  and  the 
Roman  legates,  should  meet  in  the  presence  of  the  commis- 
sioners, and  decide  upon  a  formula  of  the  faith,  and  bring 
it  before  the  council.  The  majority  of  the  bishops,  how- 
ever, loudly  demanded  that  the  one  just  presented  should 
be  accepted  and  subscribed  by  all,  and  charged  John  of 
Germanicia  with  being  a  Nestorian. 

The  commissioners. —  "Dioscorus  asserts  that  he  con- 
demned Flavianus  for  having  maintained  that  there  are  two 
natures  in  Christ ;  in  the  new  doctrinal  formula,  however,  it 
stands,  '  Christ  is  of  two  natures.' ' 

Anatolius. —  "Dioscorus  has  been  deposed  not  on  ac- 
count of  false  doctrine,  but  because  he  excommunicated  the 
pope,  and  did  not  obey  the  synod." 

The  commissioners. —  "The  synod  has  already  approved 
of  Leo^s  letter.  As  that  has  been  done,  then  that  which  is 
contained  in  the  letter  must  be  confessed." 

The  majority  of  the  council,  however,  insisted  upon 
adopting  the  formula  already  before  them.  The  commis- 
sioners informed  the  emperor  of  the  situation.  Immediately 
the  answer  came. 

Theemperoi^s  message. — "Either  the  proposed  commis- 
sion of  bishops  must  be  accepted,  or  the  bishops  must  indi- 
vidually declare  their  faith  through  their  metropolitans,  so 


470          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF  THE  FAITH. 

that  all  doubt  may  be  dispelled,  and  all  discord  removed. 
If  they  will  do  neither  of  these  things,  a  synod  must  be  held 
in  the  West,  since  they  refuse  here  to  give  a  definite  and 
stable  declaration  respecting  the  faith." 

TJte  majority. — "  We  abide  by  the  formula,  or  we  go  !  " 

Cecropius  of  Sevastopol. — "Whoever  will  not  subscribe 
it  can  go  [to  a  Western  council]." 

Tfte  Illyrians. — "Whoever  opposes  it  is  a  Nestorian  ; 
these  can  go  to  Rome  !  " 

Tli.e  commissioners. — "Dioscorus  has  rejected  the  expres- 
sion, '  There  are  two  natures  in  Christ,'  and  on  the  contrary 
has  accepted  '•of  two  natures  \ '  Leo  on  the  other  hand  says, 
'In  Christ  there,  are  two  natures  united;  '  which  will  you 
follow,  the  most  holy  Leo,  or  Dioscorus  ?  " 

TliG  whole  council. — "We  believe  with  Leo,  not  with 
Dioscorus  ;  whoever  opposes  this  is  a  Eutychian." 

TJie  commissioners. — "  Then  you  must  also  receive  into 
the  creed,  the  doctrine  of  Leo,  which  has  Veen  stated.'1'1 

The  council  now  asked  for  the  appointment  of  the  com- 
mission which  the  commissioners  had  suggested.  Among 
those  who  were  made  members  of  the  commission  were  a 
number  of  bishops  who  had  not  only  "vehemently  sup- 
ported "  the  doctrine  of  Eutyches,  but  had  also  actually 
taken  a  leading  part  with  Dioscorus  in  the  second  Council 
of  Ephesus.  The  commission  met  at  once  in  the  oratory  of 
the  church  in  which  the  council  was  held,  and  after  consult- 
ing together  not  a  great  while,  they  returned  to  the  council 
and  presented  the  following  preamble  :  — 

"  The  holy  and  great  and  (Ecumenical  Synod,  ...  at  Chalcedon  in 
Bithynia,  .  .  .  has  defined  as  follows  :  Our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  when  confirming  the  faith  in  his  disciples,  declared:  'Peace  I 
leave  with  you  ;  my  peace  I  give  unto  you,'  so  that  no.one  might  be  sep- 
arated from  his  neighbor  in  the  doctrines  of  religion,  but  that  the 
preaching  of  the  truth  should  be  made  known  to  all  alike.  As,  however, 
the  evil  one  does  not  cease  by  his  tares  to  hinder  the  seed  of  religion, 
and  is  ever  inventing  something  new  in  opposition  to  the  truth,  therefore 


THE   CREED    OF  LEO  AND    CIIALCEDON. 

has  God,  in  his  care  for  the  human  race,  stirred  up  zeal  in  this  pious  and 
orthodox  emperor,  so  that  he  has  convoked  the  heads  of  the  priesthood 
in  order  to  remove  all  the  plague  of  falsehood  from  the  sheep  of  Christ, 
and  to  nourish  them  with  the  tender  plants  of  truth.  This  we  have  also 
done  in  truth,  since  we  have  expelled,  by  our  common  judgment,  the 
doctrines  of  error,  and  have  renewed  the  right  faith  of  the  Fathers,  have 
proclaimed  the  creed  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  to  all,  and  have 
acknowledged  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  of  Constantinople  who  accepted 
it,  as  our  own.  While  we  now  receive  the  regulations  of  the  earlier 
Ephesine  Synod,  under  Celestine  and  Cyril,  and  its  prescriptions  con- 
cerning the  faith,  we  decree  that  the  confession  of  the  three  hundred 
and  eighteen  Fathers  at  Nica3a  js  a  light  to  the  right  and  unblemished 
faith,  and  that  that  is  also  valid  which  was  decreed  by  the  one  hundred 
and  fifty  Fathers  at  Constantinople  for  the  confirmation  of  the  Catholic 
and  apostolic  faith." 

Here  they  inserted  bodily  the  creed  of  the  council  of 
Nice  and  that  of  Constantinople,  found  on  pages  350  and  396 
of  this  book  ;  and  then  the  preamble  continued  as  follows  :  — 

"This  wise  and  wholesome  symbol  of  divine  grace  would  indeed  suf- 
fice for  a  complete  knowledge  and  confirmation  of  religion,  for  it  teaches 
everything  with  reference  to  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  declares  the  incarnation  of  the  Lord  to  those>who  receive  it  in  faith  ; 
as,  however,  those  who  would  do  away  with  the  preaching  of  the  truth 
devised  vain  expressions  through  their  own  heresies,  and,  on  the  one  side, 
dared  to  destroy  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord  and  rejected 
the  designation  of  God-bearer,  and,  on  the  other  side,  introduced  a  mixt- 
ure and  confusion  [of  the  natures],  and,  contrary  to  reason,  imagined 
only  one  nature  of  the  flesh  and  of  the  Godhead,  and  rashly  maintained 
that  the  divine  nature  of  the  Only-begotten  was,  by  the  mixture,  become 
passible,  therefore  the  holy,  great,  and  (Ecumenical  Synod  decrees  that 
the  faith  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  Fathers  shall  remain  invio- 
late, and  that  the  doctrine  afterwards  promulgated  by  the  one  hundred 
and  fifty  Fathers  at  Constantinople,  on  account  of  the  Pneumatomachi 
shall  have  equal  validity,  being  put  forth  by  them,  not  in  order  to  add  to 
the  creed  of  Nica3a  anything  that  was  lacking,  but  in  order  to  make 
known  in  writing  their  consciousness  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost  against 
the  deniers  of  his  glory. 

"  On  account  of  those,  however,  who  endeavored  to  destroy  the  mys- 
tery of  the  incarnation,  and  who  boldly  insulted  him  who  was  born  of 
the  holy  Mary,  affirmed  that  he  was  a  mere  man,  the  holy  synod  has  ac- 


472          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

cepted  as  valid  the  synodal  letter  of  St.  Cyril  to  Nestorius  and  to  the  ori- 
entals in  opposition  to  Nestorianism,  and  has  added  to  them  the  letter  of 
the  holy  archbishop  Leo  of  Rome,  written  to  Flavian  for  the  overthrow  of 
the  Eutychian  errors,  as  agreeing  with  the  doctrine  of  St.  Peter  and  as  a 
pillar  against  all  heretics,  for  tlie  confirmation  of  the  orthodox  dogmas. 
The  synod  opposes  those  who  seek  to  rend  the  mystery  of  the  incarna- 
tion into  a  duality  of  sons,  and  excludes  from  holy  communion  those  who 
venture  to  declare  the  Godhead  of  the  Only-begotten  as  capable  of  suffer- 
ing, and  opposes  those  who  imagine  a  mingling  and  a  confusion  of 
the  two  natures  of  Christ,  and  drives  away  those  who  foolishly  maintain 
that  the  servant-form  of  the  Son,  assumed  from  us,  is  from  a  heavenly 
substance,  or  any  other  [than  ours],  and  anathematizes  those  who  fable 
that  before  the  union  there  were  two  natures  of  our  Lord,  but  after  the 
union  only  one." 

Having  thus  paved  the  way,  they  presented  for  the  pres- 
ent occasion,  for  all  people,  and  for  all  time,  the  following 
creed  :  — 

"Following,  accordingly,  the  holy  Fathers,  we  confess  one  and  the 
same  Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  we  all  with  one  voice  declare  him 
to  be  at  the  same  time  perfect  in  Godhead,  and  perfect  in  manhood, 
very  God,  and  at  the  same  time  very  man,  consisting  of  a  reasonable 
soul  and  a  body,  being  t:onsubstantial  with  the  Father  as  respects  his 
Godhead,  and  at  the  same  time  consubstantial  with  ourselves  as  respects 
his  manhood  ;  resembling  us  in  all  things,  independently  of  sin  ;  begotten 
before  the  ages,  of  the  Father,  according  to  his  Godhead,  but  born,  in 
the  last  of  the  days,  of  Mary,  the  virgin  and  Mother  of  God,  for  our 
sakes  and  for  our  salvati  on  ;  being  one  and  the  same  Jesus  Christ,  Son, 
Lord,  Only-begotten,  made  known  in  two  natures  without  confusion,  with- 
out conversion,  without  severance,  vrithyut  separation  inasmuch  as  the  dif- 
ference of  the  natures  is  in  no  way  annulled  by  their  union,  but  the 
peculiar  essence  of  each  nature  is  rather  preserved,  and  conspires  in 
one  person  and  in  one  subsistence,  not  as  though  he  were  parted  or  severed 
into  two  persons,  but  is  one  and  the  same  Son,  Only-begotten,  Divine 
Word,  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  prophets  declared  concerning  him,  and 
Christ  himself  has  fully  instructed  us,  and  the  symbol  of  the  Fathers  has 
conveyed  to  us.  Since,  then,  these  matters  have  been  defined  by  us  with 
all  accuracy  and  diligence,  the  holy  and  universal  synod  has  determined 
that  no  one  shall  be  at  liberty  to  put  forth  another  faith,  whether  in 
writing,  or  by  framing,  or  devising,  or  teaching  it  to  others.  And  that 
those  who  shall  presume  to  frame,  or  publish,  or  teach  another  faith,  or 


ROYALTY  RATIFIES   THE   CREED.  473 

to  communicate  another  symbol  to  those  who  are  disposed  to  turn  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth  from  heathenism,  or  Judaism,  or  any  other 
sect  —  that  they,  if  they  be  bishops  or  clerks,  shall  suffer  deprivation, 
the  bishops  of  their  episcopal,  the  clerks  of  their  clerical,  office  ;  and  if 
monks  or  laics,  shall  be  anathematized."22 

When  the  reading  of  this  report  of  the  commission  was 
finished,  the  council  adjourned. 

THE  SIXTH  SESSION,   OCTOBER  25. 

At  this  session  the  emperoi  Marcian  and  the  empress 
Pulcheria,  came  with  their  whole  court  to  ratify  the  decision 
which  the  council  in  the  previous  session  had  reached  con- 
cerning the  faith.  Marcian  opened  the  session  in  a  speech, 
spoken  first  in  Latin  and  repeated  in  Greek,  which  was  as 
follows  :  — 

"From  the  beginning  of  our  reign  we  have  had  the  purity  of  the 
faith  peculiarly  at  heart.  As  now,  through  the  avarice  or  perversity  of 
some,  many  have  been  seduced  to  error,  we  summoned  the  present  synod 
so  that  all  error  and  all  obscurity  might  be.dispelled,  that  religion  might 
shine  forth  from  the  power  of  its  light,  and  that  no  one  should  in  future 
venture  further  to  maintain  concerning  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour,  anything  else  than  that  which  the  apostolic  preaching  and  the 
decree,  in  accordance  therewith,  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy 
Fathers  have  handed  down  to  posterity,  and  which  is  also  testified  by  the 
letter  of  the  holy  Pope  Leo  of  Rome  to  Flavian.  In  order  to  strengthen  the 
faith,  but  not  at  all  to  exercise  violence,  we  have  wished,  after  the  ex- 
ample of  Constantine,  to  be  personally  present  at  the  synod,  so  that  the 
nations  may  not  be  still  more  widely  separated  by  false  opinions.  Our 
efforts  were  directed  to  this,  that  all,  becoming  one  in  the  true  doctrine, 
may  return  to  the  same  religion,  and  honor  the  true  Catholic  faith.  May 
God  grant  this." 

As  soon  as  he  had  finished  the  speech  in  Latin, — 

The  bishops  unanimously  exclaimed. — "Many  years  to  the 

emperor,  many  years  to  the  empress  ;  he  is  the  only  son  of 

Constantine.    Prosperity  to  Marcian,  the  new  Constantine  !  " 

After  he  had  repeated  the  speech  in  Greek,  the  bishops 

repeated  their  shouts  of  adulation.     Then  the  whole  declara- 

22Evagrius's  "Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  ii,  chap,  iv,  par.  4. 


THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

tion,  preamble  and  all,  concerning  the  faith,  was  read,  at  the 
close  of  which  — 

The  Emperor  Marcian. — "Does  this  formula  of  the  faith 
express  the  view  of  all  ?  " 

I?ie  six  hundred  Mshops  all  shouting  at  once. — "We  all 
believe  thus  ;  there  is  one  faith,  one  will ;  we  are  all  unani- 
mous, and  have  unanimously  subscribed  ;  we  are  all  ortho- 
dox !  This  is  the  faith  of  the  Fathers,  the  faith  of  the  apos- 
tles, the  faith  of  the  orthodox  ;  this  faith  has  saved  the  world. 
Prosperity  to  Marcian,  the  new  Coiistantine,  the  new  Paul, 
the  new  David  !  long  years  to  our  sovereign  lord  David  ! 
You  are  the  peace  of  the  world,  long  life  !  Your  faith  will 
defend  you.  Thou  honorest  Christ.  He  will  defend  thee. 
Thou  hast  established  orthodoxy.  ...  To  the  august  em- 
press, many  years  !  You  are  the  lights  of  orthodoxy.  .  .  . 
Orthodox  from  her  birth,  God  will  defend  her.  Defender 
of  the  faith,  may  God  defend  her.  Pious,  orthodox  enemy 
of  heretics,  God  will  defend  her.  Thou  hast  persecuted  all 
the  heretics.  May  the  evil  eye  be  averted  from  your  empire  ! 
Worthy  of  the  faith,  worthy  of  Christ !  So  are  the  faithful 
sovereigns  honored.  .  .  .  Marcian  is  the  new  Constantine, 
Pulcheria  is  the  new  Helena  !  .  .  .  Your  life  is  the  safety 
of  all  ;  your  faith  is  the  glory  of  the  churches.  By  thee  the 
world  is  at  peace  ;  by  thee  the  orthodox  faith  is  established  ; 
by  thee  heresy  ceases  to  be  :  Long  life  to  the  emperor  and 
empress  ! " 23 

The  emperor  then  "gave  thanks  to  Christ  that  unity  in 
religion  had  again  been  restored,  and  threatened  all,  as  well 
private  men  and  soldiers  as  the  clergy,  with  heavy  punish- 
ment if  they  should  again  stir  up  controversies  respecting  the 
faith,"  and  proposed  certain  ordinances  which  were  made  a 
part  of  the  canons  established  in  future  sessions.  As  soon 
as  he  had  ceased  speaking,  the  bishops  again  shouted,  "Thou 
art  priest  and  emperor  together,  conqueror  in  war  and  teacher 
of  the  faith." 

23 Quoted  by  Stanley,  "History  of  the  Eastern  Church,"  Lecture  ii,  par.  34. 


THE  COUNCIL   TO  LEO.  475 

The  council  was  sitting  in  the  Church  of  St.  Euphemia, 
and  Marcian  now  announced  that  in  honor  of  St.  Euphemia 
and  the  council,  he  bestowed  upon  the  city  of  Chalcedon  the 
title  and  dignity  of  "metropolis  ;"  and  in  return  the  bishops 
all  unanimously  exclaimed,  "  This  is  just ;  an  Easter  be  over 
the  whole  world  ;  the  holy  Trinity  will  protect  thee.  We 
pray  dismiss  us." 

Instead  of  dismissing  them,  however,  the  emperor  com- 
manded them  to  remain  "three  or  four  days  longer,"  and 
to  continue  the  proceedings.  The  council  continued  until 
November  1,  during  which  time  ten  sessions  were  held,  in 
which  there  was  much  splitting  of  theological  hairs,  pro- 
nouncing curses,  and  giving  the  lie  ;  and  an  immense 
amount  of  hooting  and  yelling  in  approval  or  condemna- 
tion. None  of  it,  however,  is  worthy  of  any  further 
notice  except  to  say  that  twenty-eight  canons  were  estab- 
lished, the  last  of  which  confirmed  to  the  archbishopric  of 
Constantinople  the  dignity  which  had  been  bestowed  by 
the  Council  of  Constantinople  seventy  years  before,  and 
set  at  rest  all  dispute  on  the  matter  of  jurisdiction  by  de- 
creeing that  in  its  privileges  and  ecclesiastical  relations  it 
should  be  exalted  to,  and  hold,  the  first  place  after  that 
of  Old  Rome.  Against  this,  however,  Leo's  legates  pro- 
tested at  the  time  ;  and  Leo  himself,  in  three  letters  — 
one  to  Marcian,  one  to  Pulcheria,  and  one  to  Anatolius  — 
denounced  it  in  his  own  imperious  way. 

Having  closed  its  labors,  the  council  drew  up  and  sent  to 
Leo  a  memorial  beginning  with  the  words  of  Psalms  cxxvi, 
2,  which  read  in  substance  as  follows  :  — 

" '  Our  mouth  was  filled  with  laughter,  and  our  tongue  with  joy.' 
"  The  reason  of  this  joy  is  the  confirmation  of  the  faith  which  has 
been  preserved  by  your  Holiness  and  the  blissful  contents  of  which  have 
been  translated  by  you  as  interpreter  of  the  voice  of  Peter.     You  the 
bishops  of  Chalcedon  have  taken  as  their  guide,  in  order  to  show  to  the 
sons  of  the  church  the  inheritance  of  the  truth.     Your  letter  has  been 
for  us  a  spiritual,  imperial  banquet,  tfnd  we  believe  we  have  had  the 
heavenly  Bridegroom  present  at  it  in  our  midst.     As  the  head  over  the 
37 


476          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

members,  so  have  you  by  your  representatives,  had  the  predominance 
among  us.  In  order  that  everything  might  proceed  in  the  most  orderly 
manner,  however,  the  faithful  emperors  have  had  the  presidency.  The 
wild  beast  Dioscorus,  having  in  his  madness  attacked  even  him  who  is 
by  the  Saviour  a  keeper  of  the  divine  vineyard,  and  having  dared  to  ex- 
communicate him  whose  vocation  it  is  to  unite  the  body  of  the  church,  the 
synod  has  inflicted  meet  punishment  upon  him  because  he  has  not  re- 
pented and  appeared  in  answer  to  our  exhortation.  All  our  other  busi- 
ness has  been  prosperously  conducted  by  God's  grace  and  through  St. 
Euphemia,  who  has  crowned  the  assembly  held  in  her  bridal  chamber, 
and  has  transmitted  its  doctrinal  decree  as  her  own  to  her  bride- 
groom Christ  by  the  hand  of  the  emperor  and  the  empress.  .  .  .  We  have 
also  confirmed  the  canon  of  the  synod  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Fath- 
ers, by  which  the  second  rank  is  assigned  to  the  see  of  Constantinople, 
immediately  after  thy  holy  and  apostolic  see.  We  have  done  it  with  confi- 
dence, because  you  have  so  often  allowed  the  apostolic  ray  which  shines  by 
you  to  appear  to  the  church  at  Constantinople,  and  because  you  are  accus- 
tomed ungrudgingly  to  enrich  those  who  belong  to  you  by  allowing  them 
participation  in  your  own  possessions.  Be  pleased,  therefore,  to  embrace 
this  decree  as  though  it  were  thine  own,  most  holy  and  most  blessed  father. 
Thy  legates  have  strongly  opposed  it,  probably  because  they  thought  that 
this  good  regulation,  like  the  declaration  of  the  faith,  should  proceed  from 
thyself.  But  we  were  of  an  opinion  that  it  belonged  to  the  (Ecumen- 
ical Synod  to  confirm  its  prerogatives  to  the  imperial  city  in  accordance 
with  the  wish  of  the  emperor,  assuming  that  when  thou  hadst  heard  it, 
thou  wouldst  regard  it  as  thine  own  act.  For  all  that  the  sons  have  done, 
which  is  good,  conduces  to  the  honor  of  the  fathers.  We  pray  thee, 
honor  our  decree  also  by  thine  assent ;  and  as  we  have  assented  to  thy 
good  decree,  so  may  thy  loftiness  accomplish  that  which  is  meet  towards 
the  sons.  This  will  also  please  the  emperors,  who  have  sanctioned  thy 
judgment  in  the  faith  as  law  ;  and  the  see  of  Constantinople  may  well 
receive  a  reward  for  the  zeal  with  which  it  united  itself  with  thee  in  the 
matter  of  religion.  In  order  to  show  that  we  have  done  nothing  from 
favor  or  dislike  towards  any  one,  we  have  brought  the  whole  contents 
of  what  we  have  done  to  thy  knowledge,  and  have  communicated  it  to 
thee  for  confirmation  and  assent." 

This  was  followed  up  December  18,  by  two  letters  to  Leo 
from  the  emperor  and  the  archbishop  of  Constantinople, 
Anatolius,  saying  that  he  had  constantly  done  all  for  the 
honor  of  Leo  and  his  legates,  and  from  reverence  for  the 
pope,  the  council  and  himself  had  transmitted  all  to  Leo  for 


IMPERIAL  EDICTS  ENFORCE   THE   CREED.  477 

his  approval  and  confirmation  ;  Marcian  expressing  his  glad- 
ness that  the  true  faith  had  received  its  expression  in  accord- 
ance with  the  letter  of  Leo,  and  both  praying  him  to  approve 
and  confirm  the  decrees  of  the  council,  and  especially  the 
canon  in  reference  to  the  see  of  Constantinople.  Leo  stead- 
ily denounced  that  canon,  however.  But  as  Anatolius,  in 
a  letter,  April,  454,  acknowledged  to  Leo:  "The  whole 
force  and  confirmation  of  the  decrees  have  been  reserved  for 
your  Holiness  ;  "  this  was  to  yield  absolutely  all  to  Leo,  so 
far  as  it  was  possible  for  the  council  and  its  members  to  go. 
February  7,  A.  D.  452,  the  emperor  Marcian,  in  the  name 
of  himself  and  Valentinian  III,  issued  the  following  edict 
confirming  the  creed  of  the  council :  — 

"  That  which  has  been  so  greatly  and  universally  desired  is  at  last 
accomplished.  The  controversy  respecting  orthodoxy  is  over,  and  unity 
of  opinion  is  restored  among  the  nations.  The  bishops  assembled  in 
Chalcedon  at  my  command  from  various  exarchies,  have  taught  with 
exactness  in  a  doctrinal  decree  what  is  to  be  maintained  in  respect  to 
religion.  All  unholy  controversy  must  now  cease,  as  he  is  certainly 
impious  and  sacrilegious  who,  after  the  declaration  made  by  so  many 
bishops,  thinks  that  there  still  remains  something  for  his  own  judgment 
to  examine.  For  it  is  evidently  a  sign  of  extreme  folly  when  a  man 
seeks  for  a  deceptive  light  in  broad  day.  He  who,  after  discovery  has 
been  made  of  the  truth,  still  inquires  after  something  else,  seeks  for 
falsehood.  No  cleric,  no  soldier,  and  generally  no  one,  in  whatever 
position  he  may  be,  must  venture  publicly  to  dispute  concerning  the 
faith,  seeking  to  produce  confusion,  and  to  find  pretexts  for  false  doc- 
trines. For  it  is  an  insult  to  the  holy  synod  to  subject  that  which  it  has 
decreed  and  fundamentally  established,  to  new  examinations  and  public 
disputes,  since,  that  which  was  recently  defined  concerning  the  Christian 
faith  is  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  of  the  three  hundred  and  eight- 
een Fathers  and  the  regulation  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Fathers. 
The  punishment  of  the  transgressors  of  this  law  shall  not  be  delayed, 
since  they  are  not  only  opponents  of  the  lawfully  established  faith  but 
also  by  their  contentions  betray  the  holy  mysteries  to  the  Jews  and 
heathen.  If  a  cleric  ventures  openly  to  dispute  respecting  religion,  he 
shall  be  struck  out  of  the  catalogue  of  the  clergy,  the  soldier  shall  be 
deprived  of  his  belt,  other  persons  shall  be  removed  from  the  residence 
city,  and  shall  have  suitable  punishments  inflicted  upon  them,  according 
to  the  pleasure  of  the  courts  of  justice." 


478         THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

The  following  July  28,  he  issued  a  decree  in  which  he 
forbade  the  Eutychians  to  have  any  clergy  ;  and  if  anybody 
should  attempt  to  appoint  any,  both  they  who  should  ap- 
point and  he  who  was  appointed,  should  be  punished  with 
confiscation  of  goods  and  banishment  for  life.  They  were 
forbidden  to  hold  any  assemblies  of  any  kind,  or  to  build, 
or  to  live  in,  monasteries'.  If  they  should  presume  to  hold 
any  kind  of  meeting,  then  the  place  where  it  was  held  would 
be  confiscated,  if  it  was  with  the  knowledge  of  the  owner. 
But  if,  without  the  knowledge  of  the  owner  it  was  rented  by 
some  one  for  them,  he  who  rented  it  should  be  punished 
with  a  beating,  with  confiscation  of  goods,  and  with  banish- 
ment. They  were  declared  incapable  of  inheriting  anything 
by  will,  or  of  appointing  any  Eutychian  an  heir.  If  any 
were  found  in  the  army,  they  were  to  be  expelled  from  it. 
Those  of  them  who  had  formerly  been  in  the  orthodox  faith, 
and  also  the  monks  of  the  monastery  —  he  called  it  the 
"stable"  —  of  Eutyches,  were  to  be  driven  entirely  beyond 
the  boundaries  of  the  Roman  empire.  All  their  writings 
were  to  be  burnt,  whoever  circulated  them  was  to  be  ban- 
ished, and  all  instruction  in  the  Eutychian  doctrine  was  to 
be  "rigorously  punished."  And  finally,  all  governors  of 
provinces  with  their  officials,  and  all  judges  in  the  cities  who 
should  be  negligent  in  enforcing  the  law,  were  to  be  fined 
ten  pounds  of  gold,  as  despisers  of  religion  and  the  laws. 

At  the  same  time  that  this  last  decree  was  issued, 
Eutyches  and  Dioscorus  were  sentenced  to  banishment. 
Eutyches  died  before  the  sentence  was  enforced;  and  Dios- 
corus died  in  exile  at  Gangra  in  Paphlagonia  two  years 
afterward. 

As  Leo  had  published  his  letters  rejecting  the  canon  con- 
cerning the  see  of  Constantinople,  and  had  not  yet  formally 
published  any  approval  of  the  doctrinal  decree  of  the  council, 
the  report  went  abroad  throughout  the  East  that  he  had 
repudiated  all  the  decisions  of  the  council.  The  report, 


LEO  "CONFIRMS"    THE  CREED.  4.79 

therefore,  was  a  new  incentive  to  all  who  disagreed  with  the 
creed  of  the  council,  and  ' '  heresy  "  became  again  so  preva- 
lent that  February  15,  A.  D.  453,  Marcian  addressed  a  letter 
to  Leo  earnestly  beseeching  him  as  soon  as  possible  to  issue 
a  decree  in  confirmation  of  the  decision  of  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon,  "so  that  no  one  might  have  any  further  doubt 
as  to  the  judgment  of  his  Holiness."  March  21,  Leo  re- 
sponded in  the  following  words  :  — 

"I  doubt  not,  brethren,  that  you  all  know  how  willingly  I  have 
confirmed  the  doctrinal  decree  of  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon.  You  would 
have  been  able  to  learn  this  not  only  from  the  assent  of  my  legates,  but 
also  from  my  letters  to  Anatolius  of  Constantinople,  if  he  had  brought 
the  answer  of  the  apostolic  see  to  your  knowledge.  But  that  no  one 
may  doubt  my  approving  of  that  which  was  decreed  at  the  Synod  of 
Chalcedon  by  universal  consent  in  regard  to  the  faith,  I  have  directed 
this  letter  to  all  my  brethren  and  fellow-bishops  who  were  present  at  the 
synod  named,  and  the  emperor  will,  at  my  request,  send  it  to  you,  so  that 
you  may  all  know  that,  not  merely  by  my  legates,  but  also  by  my  own 
confirmation  of  it,  I  have  agreed  with  you  in  what  was  done  at  the  synod  ; 
but  only,  as  must  always  be  repeated,  in  regard  to  the  subject  of  the  faith, 
on  account  of  which  the  general  council  was  assembled  at  the  command 
of  the  emperors,  in  agreement  with  the  apostolic  see.  But  in  regard  to 
the  regulations  of  the  Fathers  of  Nicsea,  I  admonish  you  that  the  rights 
of  the  individual  churches  must  remain  unaltered,  as  they  were  there 
established  by  the  inspired  Fathers.  No  unlawful  ambition  must  covet 
that  which  is  not  its  own,  and  no  one  must  increase  by  the  diminution  of 
others.  And  that  which  pride  has  obtained  by  enforced  assent,  and 
thinks  to  have  confirmed  by  the  name  of  a  council,  is  invalid,  if  it  is  in 
opposition  to  the  canons  of  the  aforesaid  Fathers  [of  Nicsea].  How 
reverentially  the  apostolic  see  maintains  the  rules  of  these  Fathers,  and 
that  I  by  God's  help  shall  be  a  guardian  of  the  Catholic  faith  and  of  the 
ecclesiastical  canons,  you  may  see  from  the  letter  by  which  I  have  re- 
sisted the  attempts  of  the  bishop  of  Constantinople." 

As  the  necessity  for  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  was  created 
by  the  will  of  Leo  alone  ;  as  the  council  when  assembled 
was  ruled  from  beginning  to  end  by  his  legates  in  his  name  ; 
as  the  documents  presented  in  the  council  were  addressed  to 
"Leo,  the  most  holy,  blessed,  and  universal  patriarch  of 


480          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

the  great  city  of  Rome,  and  to  the  holy  and  (Ecumenical 
Council  of  Chalcedon  ; "  as  the  council  distinctly  acknowl- 
edged Leo  as  its  head,  and  the  members  of  the  council 
as  members  of  him  ;  as  the  judgments  were  pronounced  as 
his  own  ;  as  his  letter  was  made  the  test,  and  the  expression 
of  the  faith,  and  with  that  all  were  required  to  agree  ;  as  the 
decisions  of  the  council  were  submitted  to  him  for  approval, 
and  were  practically  of  little  or  no  force  until  he  had  formally 
published  his  approval,  and  then  only  such  portion  as  he  did 
approve  ;  as,  in  skort,  everything  in  connection  with  the 
council  sprung  from  his  will  and  returned  in  subjection  to 
his  will, —  Leo,  and  in  him  the  bishopric  of  Rome,  thus  be- 
came essentially  the  fountain  of  the  Catholic  faith. 

It  is  not  at  all  surprising,  therefore,  that  Leo  should 
officially  declare  that  the  doctrinal  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  were  inspired.  This  is  precisely  what  he  did. 
In  a  letter  to  Bishop  Julian  of  Cos  (Epistle  144),  he  said  : 
' '  The  decrees  of  Chalcedon  are  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  are  to  ~be  received  as  the  definition  of  the  faith  for  the 
welfare  of  the  whole  world."  And  in  a  letter  (Epistle  145) 
to  the  emperor  Leo,  who  succeeded  Marcian  in  A.  D.  457, 
he  said  :  ' '  The  Synod  of  Chalcedon  was  held  by  divine  in- 
spiration." As,  therefore,  the  doctrinal  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  were  the  expression  of  the  will  of 
Leo  ;  and  as  these  decrees  were  published  and  held  as  of 
divine  inspiration  ;  by  this  turn,  it  was  a  very  short  cut  to 
the  infallibility  of  the  bishop  of  Rome. 

Now  let  the  reader  turn  to  pages  436  and  470  and  472, 
and  compare  the  Italicized  words  in  the  statement  of  Euty- 
ches,  in  the  statement  of  the  commissioners  in  the  council, 
and  in  the  creed  of  Chalcedon.  It  will  be  seen  that  Leo 
and  the  council  came  so  near  to  saying  what  Eutyches  had 
said,  that  no  difference  can  be  perceived.  Eutyches  had 
been  condemned  as  a  heretic  for  saying  that  in  Christ,  after 
the  incarnation,  the  two  natures  are  one.  Now  Leo  and 


THE   WORK  OF   THE  FOUR   COUNCILS.  481 

the  council  express  the  orthodox  faith  by  saying  that  in 
Christ  there  are  two  natures  united  in  one.  In  other  words, 
Eutyches  was  a  condemned  heretic  for  saying  that  Christ  is 
"<9/  two  natures  ;  "  while  Leo  and  the  council  were  declared 
everlastingly  orthodox  for  saying  that  Christ  is  "m  two 
natures."  In  Greek,  the  difference  was  expressed  in  the 
two  small  words,  ek  and  en  /  which,  like  the  two  large  words, 
Homoousion  and  Homoiousion,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
controversy  between  Alexander  and  Arius,  differed  only 
in  a  single  letter.  And  like  that  also,  the  meaning  of 
the  two  words  is  so  "essentially  the  same,"  that  he  who 
believes  either,  believes  the  other.  ' '  Such  was  the  device  of 
the  envious  and  God-hating  demon  in  the  change  of  a  single 
letter,  that,  while  in  reality  the  one  expression  was  com- 
pletely inductive  of  the  notion  of  the  other,  still  with  the 
generality  the  discrepancy  between  them  was  held  to  be  con- 
siderable, and  the  ideas  conveyed  by  them  to  be  clearly  in 
diametric  opposition,  and  exclusive  of  each  other  ;  whereas 
he  who  confesses  Christ  in  two  natures,  clearly  affirms  him 
to  be  from  two,  .  .  .  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  position  of 
one  who  affirms  his  origin  from  two  natures,  is  completely 
inclusive  of  his  existence  in  two.  ...  So  that  in  this  case 
by  the  expression,  ''from  two  natures,'  is  aptly  suggested 
the  thought  of  the  expression,  i  in  two,'  and  conversely; 
nor  can  there  l>e  a  severance  of  the  terms." — JEvagriv^.Zi 

And  that  is  all  that  there  was  in  this  dispute,  or  in  any 
of  those  before  it,  in  itself.  Yet  out  of  it  there  came  con- 
stant and  universal  violence,  hypocrisy,  bloodshed,  and 
murder,  which  speedily  wrought  the  utter  ruin  of  the  empire, 
and  established  a  despotism  over  thought  which  remained 
supreme  for  ages,  and  which  is  yet  asserted  and  far  too 
largely  assented  to. 

2*  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  II,  chap,  v;  Hefele's  "History  of  the 
Church  Councils,"  sec.  193,  par.  5,  note  ;  Schaff's  "  History  of  the  Christian 
Church,"  Vol.  Hi,  \  140,  par  9.  note  2  ;  §  141,  par.  12,  note  4. 


4:82          THE  POPE  MADE  AUTHOR   OF   THE  FAITH. 

The  whole  world  having  been  thus  once  more  brought  to 
the  "unity  of  the  faith,"  the  controversy,  the  confusion,  and 
the  violence,  went  on  worse  than  before.  But  as  the  faith 
of  Leo  which  was  established  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
"substantially  completes  the  orthodox  Christology  of  the 
ancient  church,"  and  has  "passed  into  all  the  confessions  of 
the  Protestant  churches "  (Schaffz5}  ;  and  as  the  work  of 
these  four  general  councils  —  Nice,  Constantinople,  first  of 
Ephesus,  and  Chalcedon  —  was  to  put  dead  human  formulas 
in  the  place  of  the  living  oracles  of  God,  a  woman  in  the 
place  of  Christ,  and  a  MAN  IN  THE  PLACE  OF  GOD,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  follow  any  farther  the  course  of  ambitious  strife 
and  contentious  deviltry. 

25  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  142,  par.  1,  3. 


CHAPTER  XX. 


THE   CHURCH   USURPS  THE   CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 


events  related  in  the  five  chapters  immediately  pre- 
1  ceding  this,  abundantly  demonstrate  that  the  promise  of 
the  unity  of  the  faith,  which  the  bishops  made  to  Constan- 
tine,  was  a  fraud  ;  and  that  the  blessings  which  were  prom- 
ised and  expected  to  accrue  to  the  State  by  the  union  with 
the  Church,  proved  a  continual  and  horrible  curse  to  the 
State  and  to  society  in  general. 

In  tracing  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  Church,  it  has  been 
necessary  to  deal  most  largely  with  society  and  the  State  in 
the  East.  But  bad  as  it  was  in  the  East,  it  was  worse  in 
the  West.  The  reason  is  that  in  the  Eastern  empire  the 
imperial  authority  held  its  place  above  the  church  —  the 
civil  power  remained  superior  to  the  ecclesiastical  ;  whereas 
in  the  Western  empire,  the  church  exalted  itself  above  the 
State  —  the  ecclesiastical  was  made  superior  to  the  civil 
power.  To  trace  the  course,  and  to  discover  the  result,  of 
the  workings  of  the  Western  system,  that  is,  of  the  papacy 
in  fact,  is  the  purpose  of  the  present  chapter. 

In  the  sketch  of  the  bishops  of  Home  from  Melchiades 
to  Leo,  given  in  the  foregoing  chapter,  we  have  seen  the 
working  of  the  episcopal  spirit  in  exalting  the  bishopric  of 
Rome  to  the  place  of  supremacy  in  religion.  In  the  con- 
troversies which  we  have  traced,  it  is  clearly  seen  that  in 
order  to  secure  the  weight  of  the  influence  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  each  one  to  his  particular  side  of  the  question,  the 
parties  to  the  innumerable  controversies  which  kept  every- 
thing in  a  ferment,  were  always  ready  to  bestow  every  sort 

[483] 


484       THE   CHURCH  USURPS   THE   CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

of  flattering  title  and  token  of  distinction  upon  him  to  whom 
they  appealed.  Then  when  the  controversy  had  culminated 
in  the  inevitable  council,  the  victorious  party,  if  in  harmony 
with  the  bishop  of  Rome,  added  to  its  flattering  unction  on 
him  the  weight  of  the  council  in  whatever  dignities  and 
honors  it  might  choose  to  bestow.  In  fact,  there  was  never 
a  controversy  in  which  there  was  not  an  appeal  to  the  bishop 
of  Home  by  one  or  both  parties,  and  almost  always  by  both. 
And  there  never  was  a  general  council  that  agreed  with  the 
bishop  of  Rome,  by  which  there  was  not  some  special  honor 
or  dignity  conferred  upon  him. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  curious  train  of  political 
events  which  conspired  to  the  same  result,  and  which  yet 
more  fully  opened  the  way  for  the  church  to  usurp  the  civil 
power,  and  for  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  encroach  upon  the 
imperial  authority. 

Diocletian  established  his  capital  at  Nicomedia,  and 
Maximian  his  at  Milan,  A.  D.  304 ;  and  with  the  exception 
of  Maxentius  and  Constantine,  during  brief  periods,  never 
afterward  was  there  an  emperor  who  made  Rome  his  capital : 
and  even  while  Constantine  did  so,  instead  of  detracting  from 
the  dignity  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  it  added  to  it ;  for  as  we 
have  seen,  the  bishop  of  Rome  bore  a  leading  part  in  the 
formation  of  the  union  of  Church  and  State,  and  the  moment 
that  that  union  was  consummated,  "the  bishop  of  Rome 
rises  at  once  to  the  rank  of  a  great  accredited  functionary. 
...  So  long  as  Constantine  was  in  Rome,  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  the  head  of  the  emperor's  religion,  became  in  public 
estimation,  ...  in  authority  and  influence,  immeasurably 
the  superior,  to  all  of  sacerdotal  rank.  .  .  .  As  long  as 
Rome  is  the  imperial  residence,  an  appeal  to  the  emperor  is 
an  appeal  to  the  bishop  of  Rome." — Milman.1 

Thus  the  presence  of  Constantine  in  Rome  redounded  to 
the  importance  and  dignity  of  the  bishopric  of  Rome  ;  but  it 
was  not  until  Constantine  had  moved  his  capital  to  Constan- 
tinople, that  the  way  was  opened  for  the  full  play  of  that 

1  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  I,  chap,  ii,  par.  1. 


EVENTS  TEAT  FAVORED    THE  PAPACY.  485 

arrogant  spirit  that  has  ever  been  the  chief  characteristic 
of  that  dignitary.  "The  absence  of  a  secular  competitor 
allowed  the  papal  authority  to  grow  up  and  to  develop  its 
secret  strength "  (Milman 2)  ;  and  under  the  blandishments 
of  necessitous  imperial  favor  he  did  as  he  pleased,  and  more 
rapidly  than  ever  his  power  grew. 

In  the  sketch  of  the  hierarchy,  given  on  page  390,  it 
will  be  noticed  that  in  the  gradation  of  the  church  dignita- 
ries the  ascent  was  only  so  far  as  corresponded  to  the  four 
prefects  in  the  State.  There  was  not  above  the  four  patri- 
archs a  bishop  over  all,  as  above  the  prefects  the  emperor 
was  over  all.  The  one  great  reason  for  this  is  that  Constan- 
tine  was  not  only  emperor  but  bishop,  and  as  "bishop  of 
externals  "  in  the  church,  he  held  the  place  of  chief  bishop, 
—  supreme  pontiff  —  over  the  four  patriarchs  precisely  as 'he 
held  as  emperor  the  chief  authority  over  the  four  prefects. 

Yet,  in  the  nature  of  things,  it  was  inevitable  and  only  a 
question  of  time  when  the  bishop  of  Rome  would  assert  as  a 
matter  of  right,  his  supremacy  over  all  others,  and  when  this 
should  be  accomplished,  the  matter  of  the  supremacy  would 
then  lie  between  him  and  the  emperor  alone,  which  would 
open  the  way  for  the  bishop  of  Home  to  encroach  upon  the 
civil  and  imperial  authority.  This  spirit  showed  itself  in 
the  action  of  the  bishop  of  Borne  in  studiously  avoiding  the 
title  of  "patriarch,"  "as  placing  him  on  a  level  with  other 
patriarchs."  He  always  preferred  the  title  of  "papa,"  or 
"pope"  (/ScfM/"3)  :  and  this,  because  "patriarch"  bespeaks 
an  oligarchical  church  government,  that  is,  government  by 
a  few  ;  whereas  "pope"  bespeaks  a  monarchical  church 
government,  that  is,  government  by  one. 

Again  :  in  all  the  "West  there  was  no  rival  to  the  bishop 
of  Rome.  Whereas  in  the  East  there  were  three  rivals  to 
one  another,  whose  jealousies  not  only  curbed  the  encroach- 
ments of  one  another,  but  built  up  the  influence  and  author- 
ity of  the  bishop  of  Rome. 

8  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  1. 

8  "  History  of  the  Christain  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  55,  par.  1,  note. 


486       THE  CHURCH  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

In  addition  to  all  these  things,  both  the  weakness  and 
the  strength  of  the  imperial  influence  and  authority  were 
made  to  serve  the  ambitious  spirit  of  the  bishopric  of  Rome. 
After  Constantino's  death,  with  the  exception  of  Valentinian  I, 
there  never  was  a  single  able  emperor  of  the  "West ;  and 
even  Valentinian  I  was  the  servant  of  the  bishop  of  Rome 
to  the  extent  that  he  "  enacted  a  law  empowering  the  bishop 
of  Rome  to  examine  and  judge  other  bishops."  —  Bower. * 
When  Constantius  exercised  authority  over  the  West,  the 
bishop  of  Rome  openly  defied  his  authority  ;  and  although 
Liberius  afterward  changed  his  views  and  submitted,  the 
example  was  never  forgotten.  And  when  Theodosius  for  a 
brief  period  exercised  authority  in  the  West,  it  was  not  only 
as  the  servant  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  but  as  the  subject  of 
the  bishop  of  Milan.  It  is  true  that  the  power  of  Ambrose 
in  that  particular  case  was  exercised  in  a  just  cause.  But  a 
power  that  could  be  carried  to  such  extremes  in  a  cause  that 
was  just,  could  as  easily  be  carried  to  the  same  extreme  in  a 
cause  that  was  unjust.  So  it  had  been  exercised  before  this 
on  several  occasions,  and  so  it  was  exercised  afterward  on 
numberless  occasions,  and  by  others  than  Ambrose. 

All  these  things  conspired  to  open  the  way  for  the  exalta- 
tion of  the  ecclesiastical  above  the  civil  power ;  and  the 
ecclesiastics  walked  diligently  in  the  way  thus  opened.  The 
seed  which  directly  bore  this  evil  fruit,  was  also  sown  in 
that  dark  intrigue  between  Constantine  and  the  bishops, 
which  formed  the  union  of  Church  and  State,  and  created 
the  papacy.  That  seed  was  sown  when  Constantine  be- 
stowed upon  the  bishops  the  right  of  judgment  in  civil 
matters. 

It  is  a  doctrine  of  Christianity,  first,  that  there  shall  be 
no  disputes  among  Christians,  and,  second,  if  any  such  do 
arise,  then  Christians  must  settle  such  differences  among 
themselves,  and  not  go  to  law  before  unbelievers.  I  Cor. 
vi,  1-7. 

*  "History  of  the  Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  8. 


TEE  BISHOPS  CENSORS   OF  MAGISTRATES.        48T 

This  order  was  faithfully  followed  in  the  church  at  the 
beginning  ;  but  as  the  power  and  influence  of  the  bishopric 
grew,  this  office  was  usurped  by  the  bishop,  and  all  such 
cases  were  decided  by  him  alone.  Until  the  union  of  Church 
and  State,  however,  every  man  had  the  right  of  appeal  from 
the  decision  of  the  bishop  to  the  civil  magistrate. 

Very  shortly  after  the  establishment  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  "  Constantiiie  likewise  enacted  a  law  in  favor  of  the 
clergy,  permitting  judgment  to  be  passed  by  the  bishops 
when  litigants  preferred  appealing  to  them  rather  than  to  the 
secular  court ;  he  enacted  that  their  decree  should  be  valid, 
and  as  far  superior  to  that  of  other  judges  as  if  pronounced 
by  the  emperor  himself  ;  that  the  governors  and  subordinate 
military  officers  should  see  to  the  execution  of  these  decrees  ; 
and  that  sentence,  when  Dassed  by  them,  should  be  irre- 
versible." —  So&omen.1 

This  was  only  in  cases,  however,  where  the  disputants 
voluntarily  appeared  and  submitted  their  causes  to  the  de- 
cision of  the  bishops.  Yet  as  the  bishops  were  ever  ready 
to  "extend  their  authority  far  beyond  their  jurisdiction,  and 
their  influence  far  beyond  their  authority"  (Milman),*  they 
so  worked  this  power  as  to  make  their  business  as  judges 
occupy  the  principal  portion  of  their  time.  "To  worldly- 
minded  bishops  it  furnished  a  welcome  occasion  for  devoting 
themselves  to  any  foreign  and  secular  affairs,  rather  than  to 
the  appropriate  business  of  their  spiritual  calling ;  and  the 
same  class  might  also  allow  themselves  to  be  governed  by 
impure  motives  in  the  settlement  of  these  disputes."  — 
Neander.1 

Some  bishops  extended  this  right  into  what  was  known 
as  the  right  of  intervention,  that  is,  the  right  of  interceding 
with  the  secular  power  in  certain  cases.  "The  privilege  of 

5"  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap,  ix,  par.  2. 

6  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  i,  par.  49. 

7  "History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,   Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  i,  par.  12. 


488       THE   CHURCH  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

interceding  with  the  secular  power  for  criminals,  prisoners, 
and  unfortunates  of  every  kind,  had  belonged  to  the  heathen 
priests,  and  especially  to  the  vestals,  and  now  passed  to  the 
Christian  ministry,  above  all  to  the  bishops,  and  thenceforth 
became  an  essential  function  of  their  office." — Schaff.* 

This  office  was  first  assumed  by  the  heathenized  bishops 
for  this  purpose,  but  soon  instead  of  interceding  they  began 
to  dictate ;  instead  of  soliciting  they  began  to  command  ; 
and  instead,  of  pleading  for  deserving  unfortunates,  they 
interfered  with  the  genuine  administration  of  the  civil  mag- 
istrates. As  early  as  the  Council  of  Aries,  A.  D.  314,  the 
second  council  that  was  held  by  the  direction  of  Constantine, 
the  church  power  began  to  encroach  in  this  matter  upon  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  State.  Canon  7  of  this  council,  charged 
the  bishops  to  take  the  oversight  of  such  of  the  civil  magis- 
trates within  their  respective  sees,  as  were  church  members  ; 
and  if  the  magistrates  acted  inconsistently  with  their  Chris- 
tian duties,  they  should  be  turned  out  of  the  church.9 

This  was  at  once  to  give  to  the  bishops  the  direction  of 
the  course  of  civil  matters.  And  the  magistrates  who  were 
members  of  the  church, —  and  it  was  not  long  before  the  great 
majority  of  them  were  such, —  knowing  that  their  acts  were  to 
be  passed  upon  for  approval  or  disapproval  by  the  bishop, 
chose  to  take  counsel  of  him  beforehand  so  as  to  be  sure 
to  act  according  to  "discipline,"  and  avoid  being  excom- 
municated. Thus  by  an  easy  gradation  and  extension  of 
power,  the  bishopric  assumed  jurisdiction  over  the  jurispru- 
dence of  the  State. 

Further,  as  the  empire  was  now  a  religious  State,  a 
"kingdom  of  God,"  the  Bible  was  made  the  code  of  civil 
procedure  as  well  as  of  religion.  More  than  this,  it  was  the 
Bible  as  interpreted  T)y  the  Jjishops.  Yet,  more  than  this,  it 

8 "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  16,  par.  5. 

'Neander,  "History  of  the  Christian  Keligion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section 
Secoud,  part  i,  div.  i,  par.  14  ;  and  the  canon  itself  in  Hefele's  "History  of  the 
Church  Councils." 


THE  BIBLE  18  MADE   THE  CODE.  489 

was  the  Bible  as  interpreted  by  the  bishops  according  to  the 
Fathers.  "The  Bible,  and  the  Bible  interpreted  by  the 
Fathers,  became  the  code,  not  of  religion  only,  but  of  every 
branch  of  knowledge."  —Milman.™  And  as  the  Fathers 
themselves,  necessarily,  had  to  be  interpreted,  the  bishops 
became  the  sole  interpreters  of  the  code,  as  well  as  the 
censors  of  the  magistracy,  in  all  the  jurisprudence  of  the 
empire. 

The  advice  which  one  of  the  model  bishops  in  the  church 
—  in  the  estimation  of  some,  a  model  even  to  this  day11 — 
gave  upon  a  certain  occasion  to  a  magistrate  who  had  con- 
sulted him  in  regard  to  the  performance  of  his  duty,  well 
illustrates  the  workings  of  this  system  as  a  system.  A  cer- 
tain officer  consulted  Ambrose,  bishop  of  Milan,  as  to  what 
he  would  better  do  in  a  certain  criminal  case.  Ambrose  told 
him  that  according  to  Romans  xiii,  he  was  authorized  to  use 
the  sword  in  punishment  of  the  crime  ;  yet,  at  the  same 
time,  advised  him  to  imitate  Christ  in  his  treatment  of  the 
woman  mentioned  in  John  viii,  who  had  been  taken  in  adul- 
tery, and  forgive  the  criminal ;  because  if  the  criminal  had 
never  been  baptized,  he  might  yet  be  converted  and  obtain 
forgiveness  of  his  sin :  and  if  he  had  been  baptized,  it  was 
proper  to  give  him  an  opportunity  to  repent  and  reform.12 

With  the  Bible  as  the  code,  this  was  the  only  thing  that 
could  be  done,  and  this  the  only  proper  advice  that  could 
be  given.  For  Christ  distinctly  commands  :  "  Judge  not ;" 
"Condemn  not."  And  he  does  directly  command  that 
when  a  brother  offends  and  is  reproved,  if  he  repents,  he  is 
to  be  forgiven  ;  and  if  he  does  it  seven  times  in  a  day  and 
seven  times  in  a  day  turns  and  says  "I  repent,"  so  often  is 
he  to  be  forgiven.  Therefore,  with  the  Bible  as  the  code, 
the  advice  which  Ambrose  gave  was  the  only  advice  which 

10  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  v,  par.  17. 

11  See  Schaff,  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol,  iii,  §  175. 
12Neander,  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section 

Second,  part  i,  div.  i,  par.  14. 


490      THE  CHURCn  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

could  properly  be  given.  But  it  was  destructive  of  civil 
government.  And  this  is  only  to  say  that  it  was  an  utter 
perversion  of  the  Bible  to  make  it  the  code  of  civil  procedure. 
Such  procedure  therefore  in  civil  government  where  there 
was  no  possible  means  of  knowing  that  repentance  was 
genuine  or  reformation  sure,  was  to  destroy  civil  govern- 
ment, and  substitute  for  it  only  a  pretense  at  moral  govern- 
ment which  was  absolutely  impotent  for  any  good  purpose, 
either  moral  or  civil.  In  other  words,  it  was  only  to  destroy 
the  State,  and  to  substitute  for  it,  in  everything,  the  church. 

This  is  not  saying  anything  against  the  Bible,  nor  against 
its  principles.  It  is  only  exposing  the  awful  perversion  of 
its  principles  by  the  church  in  exalting  its  authority  above 
the  State.  God's  government  is  moral,  and  he  has  made 
provision  for  maintaining  his  government  with  the  forgive- 
ness of  transgression.  But  he  has  made  no  such  provision 
for  civil  government.  No  such  provision  can  be  made,  and 
civil  government  be  maintained.  The  Bible  reveals  God's 
method  of  saving  those  who  sin  against  his  moral  govern- 
ment. Civil  government  is  man's  method  of  preserving 
order,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  sin,  nor  the  salvation  of 
sinners.  Civil  government  prosecutes  a  man  and  finds  him 
guilty.  If  before  the  penalty  is  executed  he  repents,  God 
forgives  him  ;  but  the  government  must  execute  the  penalty. 

And  this  authority  was  carried  much  further  than  merely 
to  advise.  The  monks  and  clergy  went  so  far  at  last  as  ac- 
tually to  tear  away  from  the  civil  authorities,  criminals  and 
malefactors  of  the  worst  sort,  who  had  been  justly  con- 
demned. To  such  an  extent  was  this  carried  that  a  law  had 
to  be  enacted  in  398  ordering  that  "the  monks  and  the 
clergy  should  not  be  permitted  to  snatch  condemned  male- 
factors from  their  merited  punishment." — Neander.™  Yet 
they  were  still  allowed  the  right  of  intercession. 

This  evil  led  directly  to  another,  or  rather  only  deepened 
and  perpetuated  itself.  Ecclesiastical  offices,  especially  the 
bishoprics,  were  the  only  ones  in  the  empire  that  were  elect- 

13  Id.,  par.  17,  note. 


THE  BISHOPRIC  A  POLITICAL   OFFICE.  491 

ive.  As  we  have  seen,  all  manner  of  vile  and  criminal 
characters  had  been  brought  into  the  church.  Consequently 
these  had  a  voice  in  the  elections.  It  became  therefore  an 
object  for  the  unruly,  violent,  and  criminal  classes  to  secure 
the  election  of  such  men  as  would  use  the  episcopal  influ- 
ence in  their  interests,  and  shield  them  from  justice. 

"As  soon  as  a  bishop  had  closed  his  eyes,  the  metropoli- 
tan issued  a  commission  to  one  of  his  suffragans  to  adminis- 
ter the  vacant  see,  and  prepare,  within  a  limited  time,  the 
future  election.  The  right  of  voting  was  vested  in  the  infe- 
rior clergy,  who  were  best  qualified  to  judge  of  the  merit  of 
the  candidates  ;  in  the  senators  or  nobles  of  the  city,  all 
those  who  were  distinguished  by  their  rank  or  property ; 
and  finally  in  the  whole  body  of  the  people  who,  on  the 
appointed  day,  flocked  in  multitudes  from  the  most  remote 
parts  of  the  diocese,  and  sometimes  silenced  by  their  tumult- 
uous acclamations,  the  voice  of  reason  and  the  laws  of  disci- 
pline. These  acclamations  might  accidentally  fix  on  the 
head  of  the  most  deserving  competitor ;  of  some  ancient 
presbyter,  some  holy  monk,  or  some  layman,  conspicuous 
for  his  zeal  and  piety. 

' '  But  the  episcopal  chair  was  solicited,  especially  in  the 
great  and  opulent  cities  of  the  empire,  as  'a  temporal  rather 
than  as  a  spiritual  dignity.  The  interested  views,  the  selfish 
and  angry  passions,  the  arts  of  perfidy  and  dissimulation, 
the  secret  corruption,  the  open  and  even  bloody  violence 
which  had  formerly  disgraced  the  freedom  of  election  in  the 
commonwealths  of  Greece  and  Rome,  too  often  influenced 
the  choice  of  the  successors  of  the  apostles.  While  one  of 
the  candidates  boasted  the  honors  of  his  family,  a  second 
allured  his  judges  by  the  delicacies  of  a  plentiful  table,  and 
a  third,  more  guilty  than  his  rivals,  offered  to  share  the 
plunder  of  the  church  among  the  accomplices  of  his  sacrile- 
gious hopes."  -  Gibbon.™ 

The  offices  of  the  church,  and  especially  the  bishopric, 
thus  became  virtually  political,  and  were  made  subject  to  al] 

"  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xx,  par.  22. 

38 


492       THE  CHURCH  USURPS  THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

the  strife  of  political  methods.  As  the  logical  result,  the 
political  schemers,  the  dishonest  men,  the  men  of  violent 
and  selfish  dispositions,  pushed  themselves  to  the  front  in 
every  place  ;  and  those  who  might  have  given  a  safe  direc- 
tion to  public  affairs,  were  crowded  to  the  rear,  a*nd  in  fact 
completely  shut  out  of  office  by  the  very  violence  of  those 
who  would  have  office  at  any  cost. 

Thus  by  the  very  workings  of  the  wicked  elements  which 
had  been  brought  into  the  church  by  the  political  methods  of 
Constantino  and  the  bishops,  genuine  Christianity  was  sep- 
arated from  this  whole  Church  and  State  system,  as  it  had 
been  before  from  the  pagan  system.  The  genuine  Chris- 
tians, who  loved  the  quiet  and  the  peace  which  belong  with 
the  Christian  profession,  were  reproached  by  the  formal, 
hypocritical,  political  religionists  who  represented  both  the 
Church  and  the  State,  or  rather  the  Church  and  the  State 
in  one, —  the  real  Christians  were  reproached  by  these  with 
being  "righteous  overmuch." 

"  It  was  natural,  however,  that  the  bad  element,  which 
had  outwardly  assumed  the  Christian  garb,  should  push  itself 
more  prominently  to  notice  in  public  life.  Hence  it  was 
more  sure  to  attract  the  common  gaze,  while  the  genuinely 
Christian  temper  loved  retirement,  and  created  less  sensa- 
tion." 

"At  the  present  time,  the  relation  of  vital  Christianity 
to  the  Christianity  of  mere  form,  resembled  that  which,  in 
the  preceding  period,  existed  between  the  Christianity  of 
those  to  whom  religion  was  a  serious  concern,  and  paganism, 
which  constituted  the  prevailing  rule  of  life.  As  in  the 
earlier  times,  the  life  of  genuine  Christians  had  stood  out  in 
strong  contrast  with  the  life  of  the  pagan  world,  so  now  the 
life  of  such  as  were  Christians  not  merely  by  outward  pro- 
fession, but  also  in  the  temper  of  their  hearts,  presented  a 
strong  contrast  with  the  careless  and  abandoned  life  of  the 
ordinary  nominal  Christians.  By  these  latter,  the  others 
.  .  .  were  regarded  in  the  same  light  as,  in  earlier  times, 


THE    WORST  CHARACTERS  BECOME  BISHOPS.        493 

the  Christians  had  been  regarded  by  the  pagans.  They 
were  also  reproached  by  these  nominal  Christians,  just  as 
the  Christians  generally  had  been  taunted  before  by  the  pa- 
gans, with  seeking  to  be  righteous  overmuch."  —  Neander.™ 

In  the  episcopal  elections,  "  Sometimes  the  people  acted 
under  outside  considerations  and  the  management  of  dema- 
gogues, and  demanded  unworthy  or  ignorant  men  for  the 
highest  offices.  Thus  there  were  frequent  disturbances  and 
collisions,  and  even  bloody  conflicts,  as  in  the  election  of 
Damasus  in  Rome.  In  short  all  the  selfish  passions  and 
corrupting  influences  which  had  spoiled  the  freedom  of  the 
popular  political  elections  in  the  Grecian  and  Roman  repub- 
lics, and  which  appear  also  in  the  republics  of  modern  times, 
intruded  upon  the  elections  of  the  church.  And  the  clergy 
likewise  often  suffered  themselves  to  be  guided  by  impure 
motives."—  Schaff.™ 

It  was  often  the  case  that  a  man  who  had  never  been 
baptized,  and  was  not  even  a  member  of  the  church,  would 
be  elected  a  bishop,  and  hurried  through  the  minor  offices 
to  this  position.  Such  was  the  case  with  Ambrose,  bishop 
of  Milan,  in  A.  D.  374,  and  Nectarius,  bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople, in  381,  and  many  others.  In  the  contention  for  the 
bishopric,  there  was  as  much  political  intrigue,  strife,  con- 
tention, and  even  bloodshed,  as  there  had  formerly  been  for 
the  office  of  consul  in  the  republic  in  the  days  of  Pompey 
and  Caesar. 

It  often  happened  that  men  of  fairly  good  character  were 
compelled  to  step  aside  and  allow  low  characters  to  be  elected 
to  office,  for  fear  they  would  cause  more  mischief,  tumult,  and 
riot  if  they  were  not  elected  than  if  they  were.  Instances 
actually  occurred,  and  are  recorded  by  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
in  which  certain  men  who  were  not  members  of  the  church 
at  all,  were  elected  to  the  bishopric  in  opposition  to  others 

15 "History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section  Third, 
part  i,  div.  1.  par.  5,  6. 

16  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  49,  par.  2. 


494      THE   CHURCH  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

who  had  every  churchly  qualification  for  the  office,  because 
"they  had  the  worst  men  in  the  city  on  their  side."17  And 
Chrysostom  says  that  "  many  are  elected  on  account  of  their 
badness,  to  prevent  the  mischief  they  would  otherwise  do."18 
Such  characters  as  these  elected  to  office  by  such  characters 
as  those,  and  the  office  representing  such  authority  as  that 
did, —  nothing  but  evil  of  the  worst  kind  could  accrue  either 
to  the  civil  government  or  to  society  at  large. 

More  than  this,  as  the  men  thus  elected  were  the  dis- 
pensers of  doctrine  and  the  interpreters  of  Scripture  in  all 
points  both  religious  and  civil ;  and  as  they  owed  their  posi- 
tion to  those  who  elected  them,  it  was  only  the  natural  con- 
sequence that  they  adapted  their  interpretations  to  the  char- 
acter and  wishes  of  those  who  had  placed  them  in  their 
positions.  For  ' '  when  once  a  political  aspirant  has  bidden 
with  the  multitude  for  power,  and  still  depends  on  their 
pleasure  for  effective  support,  it  is  no  easy  thing  to  re- 
fuse their  wishes,  or  hold  back  from  their  demands."  — 
Draper.19 

Nectarius,  who  has  been  already  mentioned  after  he  had 
been  taken  from  the  prsetorship  and  made  bishop  by  such  a 
method  of  election  as  the  above — -elected  bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople before  he  had  been  baptized  —  wished  to  ordain 
his  physician  as  one  of  his  own  deacons.  'The  physician 
declined  on  the  ground  that  he  was  not  morally  fit  for  the 
office.  Nectarius  endeavored  to  persuade  him  by  saying, 
"Did  not  I,  who  am  now  a  priest,  formerly  live  much  more 
immorally  than  thou,  as  thou  thyself  well  knowest,  since 
thou  wast  often  an  accomplice  of  my  many  iniquities  ?" 
Schaff.20  —  The  physician  still  refused,  but  for  a  reason  which 
was  scarcely  more  honorable  than  that  by  which  he  was 


17Neander's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section 
Second,  part  i,  div.  ii,  par.  9,  note. 

18Schaff's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  |  49,  par.  2,  note  5. 

19  "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  Vol.  i,  chap,  x,  par.  6. 

20  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  I  59,  par.  2. 


THE  EPISCOPAL  DICTATORSHIP.  495 

urged.  The  reason  was  that  although  he  had  been  baptized, 
he  had  continued  to  practice  his  iniquities,  while  Nectarius 
had  quit  his  when  he  was  baptized. 

The  bishops'  assumption  of  authority  over  the  civil  juris- 
prudence did  not  allow  itself  to  be  limited  to  the  inferior 
magistrates.  It  asserted  authority  over  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  emperor  himself.  "In  Ambrose  the  sacerdotal  char- 
acter assumed  a  dignity  and  an  influence  as  yet  unknown  ; 
it  first  began  to  confront  the  throne,  not  only  on  terms  of 
equality,  but  of  superior  authority,  and  to  exercise  a  spirit- 
ual dictatorship  over  the  supreme  magistrate.  The  resist- 
ance of  Athanasius  to  the  imperial  authority  had  been  firm 
but  deferential,  passive  rather  than  aggressive.  In  his 
public  addresses  he  had  respected  the  majesty  of  the  em- 
pire ;  at  all  events,  the  hierarchy  of  that  period  only  ques- 
tioned the  authority  of  the  sovereign  in  matters  of  faith. 
But  in  Ambrose  the  episcopal  power  acknowledged  no  lim- 
its to  its  moral  dominion,  and  admitted  no  distinction  of 
persons. "  •  —  Milman. 21 

As  the  Church  and  the  State  were  identical,  and  as  who- 
ever refused  to  submit  to  the  dictates  of  the  bishopric  was 
excommunicated  from  the  church,  this  meant  that  the  only 
effect  of  disobedience  to  the  bishop  was  to  become  an  out- 
cast in  society,  if  not  an  outlaw  in  the  State.  And  more 
than  this,  in  the  state  of  abject  superstition  which  now  pre- 
vailed, excommunication  from  the  church  was  supposed  to 
mean  consignment  to  perdition  only.  "The  hierarchical 
power,  from  exemplary,  persuasive,  amiable,  was  now  au- 
thoritative, commanding,  awful.  When  Christianity  became 
the  most  powerful  religion,  when  it  became  the  religion  of 
the  many,  of  the  emperor,  of  the  State,  the  convert  or  the 
hereditary  Christian  had  no  strong  pagan  party  to  receive 
him  back  into  its  bosom  when  outcast  from  the  church.  If 
he  ceased  to  believe,  he  no  longer  dared  cease  to  obey.  No 
course  remained  but  prostrate  submission,  or  the  endurance 

21  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  x,  par.  2. 


496       THE  CHURCH  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

of  any  penitential  duty  which  might  be  enforced  upon  him." 
—  Milman.™ 

"When  the  alliance  was  made  between  the  bishops  and 
Constantine,  it  was  proposed  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  authorities  should  remain  separate,  as  being 
two  arms  of  the  same  responsible  body.  This  was  shown  in 
that  saying  of  Constantine  in  which  he  represented  himself 
as  a  "bishop  of  externals"  of  the  church,  that  which  per- 
tained more  definitely  to  its  connection  with  civil  society 
and  conduct ;  while  the  regular  bishops  were  bishops  of  the 
internal,  or  those  things  pertaining  to  the  sacraments,  ordi- 
nation, etc.  "  Constantine  .  .  .  was  the  first  representative 
of  the  imposing  idea  of  a  Christian  theocracy,  or  of  a  system 
of  policy  which  assumes  all  subjects  to  be  Christians,  con- 
nects civil  and  religious  rights,  and  regards  Church  and  State 
as  the  two  arms  of  one  and  the  same  divine  government  on 
earth.  This  idea  was  more  fully  developed  by  his  success- 
ors, it  animated  the  whole  Middle  Age,  and  is  yet  working 
under  various  forms  in- these  latest  times." — ScJMff.™ 

To  those  who  conceived  it,  this  theory  might  have  ap- 
peared well  enough,  and  simply  in  theory  it  might  have  been 
imagined  that  it  could  be  made  to  work  ;  but  when  it  came  to 
be  put  into  practice,  the  all-important  question  was,  Where 
was  the  line  which  defined  the  exact  limits  between  the  juris- 
diction of  the  magistrate  and  that  of  the  bishop  ?  between 
the  authority  of  the  Church  and  that  of  the  State?  The 
State  was  now  a  theocracy.  The  government  was  held  to 
be  moral,  a  government  of  God  ;  the  Bible  the  supreme  code 
of  morals,  "was  the  code  of  the  government ;  there  was  no 
such  thing  as  civil  government  —  all  was  moral.  But  the 
subject  of  morals  is  involved  in  every  action,  yea,  in  every 
thought  of  man.  The  State  then  being  allowed  to  be  moral, 
it  was  inevitable  that  the  church,  being  the  arbiter  of 
morals  and  the  dispenser  and  interpreter  *f  the  code  regu- 
lating moral  action,  would  interpose  in  all  questions  of 

22  Id.,  book  iv,  chap,  i,  t>ar.  85. 

88 "History  of  the  Christian  Church."  VoL  iii,  \  2,  par.  8. 


CIVIL   GOVERNMENT   VANISHES.  497 

human  conduct,  and  spread  her  dominion  over  the  whole 
field  of  human  action. 

"  In  ecclesiastical  affairs,  strictly  so  called,  the  supremacy 
of  the  Christian  magistracy,  it  has  been  said,  was  admitted. 
They  were  the  legislators  of  discipline,  order,  and  doctrine. 
The  festivals,  the  fasts,  the  usages,  and  canons  of  the 
church,  the  government  of  the  clergy,  were  in  their  ex- 
clusive power.  The  decrees  of  particular  synods  and  coun- 
cils possessed  undisputed  authority,  as  far  as  their  sphere 
extended.  General  councils  were  held  binding  on  the  whole 
church.  But  it  was  far  more  easy  to  define  that  which  did 
belong  to  the  province  of  the  church  than  that  which  did 
not.  Religion  asserts  its  authority,  and  endeavors  to  extend 
its  influence  over  the  whole  sphere  of  moral  action, 
which  is,  in  fact,  over  the  whole  of  human  life,  its  habits, 
manners,  conduct. 

' '  Christianity,  as  the  most  profound  moral  religion,  ex- 
acted the  most  complete  and  universal  obedience  ;  and,  as 
the  acknowledged  teachers  and  guardians  of  Christianity, 
the  clergy  continued  to  draw  within  their  sphere  every  part 
of  human  life  in  which  man  is  actuated  by  moral  or  religious 
motives.  The  moral  authority,  therefore,  of  the  religion,  and 
consequently  of  the  clergy,  might  appear  legitimately  to  ex- 
tend over  every  transaction  of  life,  from  the  legislature  of  the 
sovereign,  which  ought,  in  a  Christian  king,  to  be  guided  by 
Christian  motive,  to  the  domestic  duties  of  the  peasant,  which 
ought  to  be  fulfilled  on  the  principle  of  Christian  love.  .  .  . 

"But  there  was  another  prolific  source  of  difference. 
The  clergy,  in  one  sense,  from  being  the  representative 
body,  had  begun  to  consider  themselves  the  church;  but, 
in  another  and  more  legitimate  sense,  the  State,  when 
Christian,  as  comprehending  all  the  Christians  of  the 
empire,  became  the  Church.  Which  was  the  legislative 
body, —  the  whole  community  of  Christians  ?  or  the  Chris- 
tian aristocracy,  who  were  in  one  sense  the  admitted  rulers  ? 
— -Milman.** 

84 "History  of  Christianity,  book  Iv,  chap.  1,  par.  58-66. 


498       THE   CHURCH  USURPS   THE  CIVIL  AUTHORITY. 

To  overstep  every  limit  and  break  down  every  barrier 
that  seemed  in  theory  to  be  set  between  the  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical powers,  was  the  only  consequence  that  could  result 
from  such  a  union.  And  when  itjwas  attempted  to  put  the 
theory  into  practice,  every  step  taken  in  any  direction  only 
served  to  demonstrate  that  which  the  history  everywhere 
shows,  that  "the  apparent  identification  of  the  State  and 
Church  by  the  adoption  of  Christianity  as  the  religion  of  the 
empire,  altogether  confounded  the  limits  of  ecclesiastical  and 
temporal  jurisdiction."  —  JMJUman.** 

The  State,  as  a  body  distinct  from  the  Church,  was 
gone.  As  a  distinct  system  of  law  and  government  the 
State  was  destroyed,  and  its  machinery  existed  only  as  the 
tool  of  the  Church  to  accomplish  her  arbitrary  will  and  to 
enforce  her  despotic  decrees. 

25  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  ii,  chap,  iii,  par.  40. 


-m 


CHAPTER   XXI. 


THE   RUIN    OF  THE   ROMAN   EMPIRE. 

WE  have  seen  the  church  secure  the  enactment  of  laws  by 
which  she  could  enforce  church  discipline  upon  all  the 
people,  whether  in  the  church  or  not.  We  have  seen  her  next 
extend  her  encroachments  upon  the  civil  power,  until  the 
whole- system  of  civil  jurisprudence,  as  such,  was  destroyed 
by  being  made  religious.  We  shall  now  see  how  the  evils 
thus  engendered,  and  like  dragon's  teeth  sown  broadcast, 
with  another  element  of  the  monstrous  evil  planted  by  Con- 
stantino and  the  bishops,  caused  the  final  and  fearful  ruin  of 
the  Roman  empire. 

Among  the  first  of  the  acts  of  Constantino  in  his  favors 
to  the  church  was,  as  has  been  shown  on  page  290  of  this 
book,  the  appropriation  of  money  from  the  public  treasury 
to  the  bishops. 

Another  enactment,  A.  D.  321,  of  the  same  character,  but 
which  was  of  vastly  more  importance,  was  his  glinting  to 
the  church  the  right  to  receive  legacies.  "This  was  a  law 
which  expressly  secured  to  the  churches  a  right  which,  per- 
haps, they  had  already  now  and  then  tacitly  exercised  ; 
namely,  the  right  of  receiving  legacies,  which,  in  the  Roman 
empire,  no  corporation  whatever  was  entitled  to  exercise, 
unless  it  had  been  expressly  authorized  to  do  so  by  the 
State."— Neander.1 

Some  estimate  of  this  enactment  may  be  derived  from 
the  statement  that  "  the  law  of  Constantime  which  empow- 

1 "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  11,  Section  Second, 
part  i,  div.  1,  par.  7.  [499] 


500  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

ered  the  clergy  of  the  church  to  receive  testamentary  be 
quests,  and  to  hold  land,  was  a  gift  which  would  scarcely 
have  been  exceeded  if  he  had  granted  them  two  provinces 
of  the  empire." — Milman*  That  which  made  this  still  more 
magnificent  gift  to  the  church  was  the  view  which  prevailed, 
especially  among  the  rich,  that  they  could  live  as  they 
pleased  all  their  lives,  and  then  at  their  death  give  their 
property  to  the  church,  and  be  assured  a  safe  conduct  to 
eternal  bliss.  "It  became  almost  a  sin  to  die  without  some 
bequest  to  pious  uses." — Milman* 

We  have  seen  in  the  previous  chapter  what  kind  of  char- 
acters were  chosen  to  the  bishopric  in  those  times ;  and  when 
such  a  law  was  now  made  bestowing  such  privileges  upon 
such  characters,  it  is  easy  to  understand  what  use  would  be 
made  of  the  privilege.  Not  content  with  simply  receiving 
bequests  that  might  voluntarily  be  made,  they  brought  to 
bear  every  possible  means  to  induce  persons  to  bestow  their 
goods  upon  the  churches.  They  assumed  the  protectorship 
of  widows  and  orphans,  and  had  the  property  of  such  persons 
left  to  the  care  of  the  bishop. 

Now  into  the  coffers  of  the  bishops,  as  into  the  coffers  of 
the  republic  after  the  fall  of  Carthage,  wealth  came  in  a 
rolling  stream  of  gold,  and  the  result  in  this  case  was  the 
same  as  in  that.  With  wealth  came  luxury  and  magnificent 
display.  The  bishopric  assumed  a  stateliness  and  grandeur 
that  transcended  that  of  the  chief  ministers  of  the  empire  ; 
and  that  of  the  bishopric  of  Rome  fairly  outshone  the  glory 
of  the  emperor  himself.  He  was  the  chief  beneficiary  in  all 
these  favors  of  Constantine. 

As  already  related,  when  the  emperors  in  the  time  of 
Diocletian  began  habitually  to  absent  themselves  from  Rome, 
the  bishop  of  Rome  became  the  chief  dignitary  in  the  city. 
And  by  the  time  that  Constantine  moved  the  capital  perma- 
nently from  Rome,  through  these  imperial  favors  the  bishop 
of  that  city  had  acquired  such  a  dignity  that  it  was  easy  for 
him  to  step  into  the  place  of  pomp  and  magnificent  display 

2  "  History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  i,  par.  39.  3  Id. 


TEE  BISHOPRIC  OF  ROME.  501 

that  had  before  been  shown  by  the  emperor.  ' '  The  bishop 
of  Rome  became  a  prince  of  the  empire,  and  lived  in  a  style 
of  luxury  and  pomp  that  awakened  the  envy  or  the  just  indig- 
nation of  the  heathen  writer,  Marcellinus.  The  church  was 
now  enriched  by  the  gifts  and  bequests  of  the  pious  and  the 
timid  ;  the  bishop  drew  great  revenues  from  his  farms  in 
the  Campagna  and  his  rich  plantations  in  Sicily  ;  he  rode 
through  the  streets  of  Rome  in  a  stately  chariot,  and  clothed 
in  gorgeous  attire  ;  his  table  was  supplied  with  a  profusion 
more  than  imperial ;  the  proudest  women  of  Rome  loaded 
him  with  lavish  donations,  and  followed  him  with  their  flat- 
teries and  attentions  ;  and  his  haughty  bearing  and  profuse 
luxury  were  remarked  upon  by  both  pagans  and  Christians 
as  strangely  inconsistent  with  the  humility  and  simplicity  en- 
joined by  the  faith  which  he  professed."-— Eugene  Lawrence.* 

The  offices  of  the  church  were  the  only  ones  in  the  em- 
pire that  were  elective.  The  bishopric  of  Rome  was  the 
chief  of  these  offices.  As  that  office  was  one  which  carried 
with  it  the  command  of  such  enormous  wealth  and  such  dis- 
play of  imperial  magnificence,  it  became  the  object  of  the 
ambitious  aspirations  of  every  Catholic  in  the  city  ;  and  even 
a  heathen  exclaimed,  "Make  me  bishop  of  Rome,  and  I 
will  be  a  Christian  !  " 

Here  were  displayed  all  those  elements  of  political  strife 
and  chicanery  which  were  but  referred  to  in  the  previous 
chapter.  The  scenes  which  occurred  at  the  election  of 
Damasus  as  bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D.  366,  will  illustrate  the 
character  of  such  proceedings  throughout  the  empire,  ac- 
cording as  the  particular  bishopric  in  question  compared 
with  that  of  Rome.  There  were  two  candidates  —  Damasus 
and  Ursicinus  —  and  these  two  men  represented  respectively 
two  factions  that  had  been  created  in  the  contest  between 
Liberius,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  Constantius,  emperor  of 
Rome. 

"The  presbyters,  deacons,  and  faithful  people,  who  had 
adhered  to  Liberius  in  his  exile,  met  in  the  Julian  Basilica, 

*  "  Historical  Studies,"  Bishops  of  Rome,  par.  13. 


502  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

and  duly  elected  Ursicinus,  who  was  consecrated  by  Paul, 
bishop  of  Tibur.  Damasus  was  proclaimed  by  the  followers 
of  Felix,  in  S.  M.  Lucina.  Damasus  collected  a  mob  of 
charioteers  and  a  wild  rabble,  broke  into  the  Julian  Basilica, 
and  committed  great  slaughter.  Seven  days  after,  having 
bribed  a  great  body  of  ecclesiastics  and  the  populace,  and 
seized  the  Lateran  Church,  he  was  elected  and  consecrated 
bishop.  Ursicinus  was  expelled  from  Rome. 

"Damasus,  however,  continued  his  acts  of  violence. 
Seven  presbyters  of  the  other  party  were  hurried  prisoners 
to  Lateran  :  their  faction  rose,  rescued  them,  and  carried 
them  to  the  Basilica  of  Liberius.  Damasus  at  the  head  of  a 
gang  of  gladiators,  charioteers,  and  laborers,  with  axes, 
swords,  and  clubs,  stormed  the  church :  a  hundred  and 
sixty  of  both  sexes  were  barbarously  killed  ;  not  one  on  the 
side  of  Damasus.  The  party  of  Ursicinus  were  obliged  to 
withdraw,  vainly  petitioning  for  a  synod  of  bishops  to  exam- 
ine into  the  validity  of  the  two  elections. 

"So  long  and  obstinate  was  the  conflict,  that  Juventius, 
the  prefect  of  the  city,  finding  his  authority  contemned,  his 
forces  unequal  to  keep  the  peace,  retired  into  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Rome.  Churches  were  garrisoned,  churches  be- 
sieged, churches  stormed  and  deluged  with  blood.  In  one 
day,  relates  Ammianus,  above  one  hundred  and  thirty  dead 
bodies  were  counted  in  the  Basilica  of  Sisinnius.  .  .  .  Nor 
did  the  contention  cease  with  the  first  discomfiture  and 
banishment  of  Ursicinus  :  he  was  more  than  once  recalled, 
exiled,  again  set  up  as  rival  bishop,  and  re-exiled.  An- 
other frightful  massacre  took  place  in  the  Church  of  St. 
Agnes.  The  emperor  was  forced  to  have  recourse  to  the 
character  and  firmness  of  the  famous  heathen  Prastextatus, 
as  successor  to  Juventius  in  the  government  of  Rome,  in 
order  to  put  down  with  impartial  severity  these  disastrous 
tumults.  Some  years  elapsed  before  Damasus  was  in 
undisputed  possessions  of  his  see."  "But  Damasus  had 
the  ladies  of  Rome  in  his  favor  ;  and  the  council  of  Yal- 
entinian  was  not  inaccessible  to  bribes.  New  scenes  of 


PRIDE  OF  THE  BISHOPS  AND   CLERQY.  503 

blood  took  place.  Ursicinus  was  compelled  at  last  to  give 
up  the  contest."  — Milmcm.& 

Of  the  bishop  of  Rome  at  this  time  we  have  the  follow- 
ing sketch  written  by  one  who  was  there  at  the  time,  and  had 
often  seen  him  in  his  splendor:  "I  must  own  that  when  I 
reflect  on  the  pomp  attending  that  dignity,  I  do  not  at  all 
wonder  that  those  who  are  fond  of  show  and  parade,  should 
scold,  quarrel,  fight,  and  strain  every  nerve  to  attain  it ; 
since  they  are  sure,  if  they  succeed,  to  be  enriched  with  the 
offerings  of  the  ladies  ;  to  appear  no  more  abroad  on  foot, 
but  in  stately  chariots,  and  gorgeously  attired  ;  to  keep 
costly  and  sumptuous  tables  ;  nay,  and  to  surpass  the  em- 
perors themselves  in  the  splendor  and  magnificence  of  their 
entertainments. "  —  Ammianus  Marcellinus. 6 

The  example  of  the  bishop 'of  Rome  was  followed  by  the 
whole  order  of  bishops,  each  according  to  his  degree  and 
opportunities.  Chrysostom  boasted  that  "  the  heads  of  the 
empire  and  the  governors  of  provinces  enjoy  no  such  honor 
as  the  rulers  of  the  church.  They  are  first  at  court,  in  the 
society  of  ladies,  in  the  houses  of  the  great.  No  one  has 
precedence  of  them."  By  them  were  worn  such  titles  as, 
"Most  holy,"  "Most  reverend,"  and  "Most  holy  Lord." 
They  were  addressed  in  such  terms  as,  "  Thy  Holiness,"  and 
"Thy  Blessedness."  "Kneeling,  kissing  of  the  hand,  and 
like  tokens  of  reverence,  came  to  be  shown  them  by  all 
classes,  up  to  the  emperor  himself."  —  ScJiajf.'1 

The  manners  of  the  minor  clergy  of  Rome  are  described 
by  one  who  was  well  acquainted  with  them.  "  His  whole 
care  is  in  his  dress,  that  it  be  well  perfumed  ;  that  his  feet 
may  not  slip  about  in  a  loose  sandal ;  his  hair  is  crisped 
with  a  curling-pin  ;  his  fingers  glitter  with  rings ;  he  walks 
on  tiptoe  lest  he  should  splash  himself  with  the  wet  soil ; 


5  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  i,  chap,  ii,  par.  18,  and  note. 
6 Book  xxvii,  chap,  iii,  par.  12-15,  Bower's  translation  in  "History  of  the 
Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  6. 

7  "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  \  53,  par.  3. 


504  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

when  you  see  him,  you  would  think  him  a  bridegroom  rather 
than  an  ecclesiastic." — Jerome.* 

Such  an  example  being  set  by  the  dignitaries  in  the  church, 
these  too  professing  to  be  the  patterns  of  godliness,  their  ex- 
ample was  readily  followed  by  all  in  the  empire  who  were  able. 
Consequently,  "The  aristocratical  life  of  this  period  seems  to 
have  been  characterized  by  gorgeous  magnificence  without 
grandeur,  inordinate  luxury  without  refinement,  the  pomp 
and  prodigality  of  a  high  state  of  civilization  with  none  of 
its  ennobling  or  humanizing  effects.  The  walls  of  the  pal- 
aces were  lined  with  marbles  of  all  colors,  crowded  with 
statues  of  inferior  workmanship,  mosaics  of  which  the 
merit  consisted  in  the  arrangement  of  the  stones ;  the  cost, 
rather  than  the  beauty  and  elegance,  was  the  test  of  excel- 
ency,  and  the  object  of  admiration.  The  nobles  were  sur- 
sounded  with  hosts  of  parasites,  or  servants.  '  You  reckon 
up,'  Chrysostom  thus  addresses  a  patrician,  'so  many  acres 
of  land,  ten  or  twenty  palaces,  as  many  baths,  a  thousand 
or  two  thousand  slaves,  chariots  plated  with  silver  or  over- 
laid with  gold.' 

"Their  banquets  were  merely  sumptuous,  without  social 
grace  or  elegance.  The  dress  of  the  females,  the  fondness 
for  false  hair  sometimes  wrought  up  to  an  enormous  height, 
and  especially  affecting  the  golden  dye,  and  for  paint,  from 
which  irresistible  propensities  they  were  not  to  be  estranged 
even  by  religion,  excite  the  stern  animadversion  of  the 
ascetic  Christian  teacher.  '  What  business  have  rouge  and 
paint  on  a  Christian  cheek  ?  Who  can  weep  for  her  sins 
when  her  tears  wrash  her  face  bare  and  mark  furrows  on  her 
skin  ?  With  what  trust  can  faces  be  lifted  up  towards  heaven, 
which  the  Maker  cannot  recognize  as  his  own  workmanship  ? ' 
Their  necks,  heads,  arms,  and  fingers  were  loaded  with 
golden  chains  and  rings  ;  their  persons  breathed  precious 
odors  ;  their  dresses  were  of  gold  stuff  and  silk :  and  in  this 
attire  they  ventured  to  enter  the  church. 

8  Quoted  and  translated  by  Milman,  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  i, 
chap,  ii,  par.  20,  note  1. 


VICES   OF   OLE  ROY  AND   PEOPLE,  505 

"Some  of  the  wealthier  Christian  matrons  gave  a  religious 
air  to  their  vanity  ;  while  the  more  profane  wore  their  thin 
silken  dresses  embroidered  with  hunting  pieces,  wild  beasts, 
or  any  other  fanciful  device,  the  more  pious  had  the  miracles 
of  Christ,  the  marriage  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  or  the  paralytic 
carrying  his  bed.  In  vain  the  preacher  urged  that  it  would 
be  better  to  emulate  these  acts  of  charity  and  love,  than  to 
wear  them  on  their  garments.  .  .  .  The  provincial  cities, 
according  to  their  natural  character,  imitated  the  old  and 
new  Rome  ;  and  in  all,  no  doubt,  the  nobility,  or  the 
higher  order,  were  of  the  same  character  and  habits."  — 
Milman.9 

As  in  the  republic  of  old,  in  the  train  of  wealth  came 
luxury,  and  in  the  train  of  luxury  came  vice  ;  and  as  the 
violence  now  manifested  in  the  election  of  the  bishops  was 
but  a  reproduction  of  the  violence  by  which  the  tribunes 
and  the  consuls  of  the  later  republic  were  chosen,  so  the 
vices  of  these  times  were  but  a  reproduction  of  the  later 
republic  and  early  empire  —  not  indeed  manifested  so  coarsely 
and  brutally  ;  more  refined  and  polished,  yet  essentially  the 
same  iniquitous  practice  of  shameful  vice. 

Another  phase  of  the  evil :  Under  the  law  empowering 
the  church  to  receive  legacies,  the^efforts  of  some  of  the 
clergy  to  persuade  people,  and  especially  women,  to  bestow 
their  wealth  upon  the  church,  took  precedence  of  every- 
thing else. 

"  Some  of  the  clergy  made  it  the  whole  business  and 
employment  of  their  lives  to  learn  the  names  of  the  ladies, 
to  find  out  their  habitations,  to  study  their  humor.  One  of 
these,  an  adept  in  the  art,  rises  with  the  sun,  settles  the  order 
of  his  visits,  acquaints  himself  with  the  shortest  ways,  and 
almost  breaks  into  the  rooms  of  the  women  before  they  are 
awake.  If  he  sees  any  curious  piece  of  household  furniture, 
he  extols,  admires,  and  handles  it ;  and,  sighing  that  he  too 
should  stand  in  need  of  such  trifles,  in  the  end  rather  extorts 
it  by  force  than  obtains  it  by  good-will,  the  ladies  being 

8 "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  i,  par.  12,  13,  15. 


506  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

afraid  to  disoblige  the  prating  old  fellow  that  is  always 
running  about  from  house  to  house."  —  Jerome.™ 

Because  of  the  insatiable  avarice  of  the  Roman  clergy, 
and  because  of  the  shameful  corruption  that  was  practiced 
with  the  means  thus  acquired,  a  law  was  enacted,  A.  D.  3TO, 
by  Valentinian  I,  forbidding  any  ecclesiastics  to  receive  any 
inheritance,  donation,  or  legacy  from  anybody ;  and  to  let 
the  world  know  that  he  did  not  complain  of  this  hardship, 
the  great  bishop  of  Milan  exclaimed  :  "We  are  excluded  by 
laws  lately  enacted  from  all  inheritances,  donations,  and 
legacies;  yet  we  do  not  complain.  And  why  should  we? 
By  such  laws  we  only  lose  wealth  ;  and  the  loss  of  wealth  is 
no  loss  to  us.  Estates  are  lawfully  bequeathed  to  the  min- 
isters of  the  heathen  temples  ;  no  layman  is  excluded,  let 
his  condition  be  ever  so  low,  let  his  life  be  ever  so  scandal- 
ous :  clerks  alone  are  debarred  from  a  right  common  to  the 
rest  of  mankind.  Let  a  Christian  widow  bequeath  her  whole 
estate  to  a  pagan  priest,  her  will  is  good  in  law  ;  let  her 
bequeath  the  least  share  of  it  to  a  minister  of  God,  her  will  is 
null.  I  do  not  mention  these  things  by  way  of  complaint, 
but  only  to  let  the  world  know  that  I  do  not  complain."  — 
Ambrose. n 

The  fact  that  such^  a  law  as  this  had  to  be  enacted  —  a 
law  applying  only  to  the  clergy  —  furnishes  decisive  proof 
that  the  ecclesiastics  were  more  vicious  and  more  corrupt  in 
their  use  of  wealth  than  was  any  other  class  in  the  empire. 
This  in  fact  is  plainly  stated  by  another  who  was  present  at 
the  time  :  "I  am  ashamed  to  say  it,  the  priests  of  the  idols, 
the  stage-players,  charioteers,  whores,  are  capable  of  inher- 
iting estates,  and  receiving  legacies ;  from  this  common 
privilege,  clerks  alone,  and  monks,  are  debarred  by  law  ; 
debarred  not  under  persecuting  tyrants,  but  Christian 
princes. "  —  Jerome. 12 

Nor  was  this  all.  The  same  pagan  rites  and  heathen 
superstitions  and  practices,  which  were  brought  into  the 

10  Quoted  by  Bower,  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  12. 

11  Id. 


Two   REPUBLICS.  39 


This  is  a  combination  sun  piece.  The  central  object  is  Mithra  in  a  cavern,  sac- 
rificing a  bull.  Mithra  was  the  sun,  the  bull  was  the  symbol  of  the  powers  of  night. 
The  blood  of  the  bull  is  to  impart  the  power  of  regeneration.  At  the  right  hand  be- 
low is  the  Genius  of  the  Night,  with  his  torch  extinguished.  At  the  left  is  the  Genius 
of  the  Day,  with  his  torch  aflame.  Above,  in  the  middle,  is  the  earth,  with  its  pro- 
ductions. At  the  left  is  Apollo  in  his  chariot,  drawn  by  four  horses,  in  this  place 
representing  the  rising  sun  ;  while  at  the  right  is  Aurora,  the  goddess  of  the  morning, 
disappearing  before  the  brightness  of  the  coming  ApoDo.  The  inscription  on  the 
body  of  the  bull  is  :  "To  Mithra,  the  invincible  Sun-God."  This  sacrifice  was  made 
at  the  winter  solstice,  what  is  now  Christmastime.  The  whole  combination-piece  is 
intended  to  represent  the  victory  of  the  sun,  the  god  of  the  day,  over  the  powers  of 
darkness,  or  of  night.  The  original  was  in  a  vault  at  Rome  under  the  capitol,  and  is 
now  in  the  Louvre,  Paris. 


MITHRA  SACRIFICING  THE  BULL. 


ABOMINATIONS  OF  SUN  WORSHIP  CONTINUED.        507 

church  when  the  Catholic  religion  became  that  of  the  em- 
pire, not  only  still  prevailed,  but  were  enlarged.  The  cele- 
bration of  the  rites  of  the  mysteries  still  continued,  only 
with  a  more  decided  pagan  character,  as  time  went  on,  and 
as  the  number  of  pagans  multiplied  in  the  church.  To  add 
to  their  impressiveness,  the  mysteries  in  the  church,  as  in 
the  original  Eleusinia,  were  celebrated  in  the  night.  As  the 
catechumen  came  to  the  baptismal  font,  he  "turned  to  the 
West,  the  realm  of  Satan,  and  thrice  renounced  his  power ; 
he  turned  to  the  East  to  adore  the  Sun  of  Righteousness, 
and  to  proclaim  his  compact  with  the  Lord  of  Life."  — 
Milman. 13 

About  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  there  was  added 
another  form  and  element  of  sun  worship.  Amongst  the 
pagans  for  ages,  December  25  had  been  celebrated  as  the 
birthday  of  the  sun.  In  the  reigns  of  Domitian  and  Trajan, 
Rome  formally  adopted  from  Persia  the  feast  of  the  Persian 
sun-god,  Mithras,  as  the  Mrth  festival  of  the  unconquered 
sun  —  Natales  invicti  Solis.  The  Church  of  Rome  adopted 
this  festival,  and  made  it  the  birthday  of  Christ.  And 
within  a  few  years  the  celebration  of  this  festival  of  the  sun 
had  spread  throughout  the  whole  empire  east  and  west  ; 
the  perverse-minded  bishops  readily  sanctioning  it  with  the 
argument  that  the  pagan  festival  of  the  birth  of  the  real  sun, 
was  a  type  of  the  festival  of  the  birth  of  Christ,  the  Sun  of 
Righteousness.  Thus  was  established  the  church  festival  of 
Christmas." 

This  custom,  like  the  forms  of  sun  worship  —  the  day  of 
the  sun,  worshiping  toward  the  East,  and  the  mysteries  — 
which   had  already  been  adopted,  was  so  closely  followed 
that  it  was  actually  brought  "  as  a  charge  against  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  Catholic  Church  that  they  celebrated  the  Solstitia 


13 "History  of  Christianity,"  book  Iv,  chap,  ii,  par.  8. 

"  Schaff's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  77,  par.  3, 4,  and  the 
notes  ;  Gibbon's  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxii,  par.  8,  note.  Neander's  "  His- 
tory of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Section  Third,  part  ii,  div.  iii,  par. 
21-23,  and  the  notes. 


508  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

with  the  pagans." — Weander.15  The  worship  of  the  sun 
itself  was  also  still  practiced.  Pope  Leo  I  testifies  that  in 
his  time  many  Catholics  had  retained  the  pagan  custom  of 
paying  "obeisance  from  some  lofty  eminence  to  the  sun." 
And  that  they  also  "  first  worshipped  the  rising  sun,  paying 
homage  to  the  pagan  Apollo,  before  repairing  to  the  Basilica 
of  St.  Peter."—  Schaff.™ 

The  images  and  pictures  which  had  formerly  represented 
the  sun  were  adopted  and  transformed  into  representations 
of  Christ.  How  easily  this  was  accomplished  can  be  dis- 
cerned by  an  examination  of  the  accompanying  illustration. 
And  such  was  the  origin  of  the  ' '  pictures  of  Christ "  ;  and 
especially  of  the  nimbus  or  halo  round  the  heads  of  them. 

The  martyrs,  whether  real  or  imaginary,  were  now  hon- 
ored in  the  place  of  the  heathen  heroes.  The  day  of  their 
martyrdom  was  celebrated  as  their  birthday,  and  these  cele- 
brations were  conducted  in  the  same  way  that  the  heathen 
celebrated  the  festival  days  of  their  heroes.  "The  festivals 
in  honor  of  the  martyrs  were  avowedly  instituted,  or  at  least 
conducted,  on  a  sumptuous  scale  in  rivalry  of  the  banquets 
which  formed  so  important  and  attractive  a  part  of  the 
pagan  ceremonial.  Besides  the  earliest  Agapse,  which  gave 
place  to  the  more  solemn  Eucharist,  there  were  other  kinds 
of  banquets,  at  marriages  and  funerals,  called  likewise 
Agapse. " — Mil/man. 1T 

These  festivals  were  celebrated  either  at  the  sepulchers 
of  the  martyrs  or  at  the  churches,  and  the  day  began  with 
hymns  ;  the  history  or  fables  of  their  lives  and  martyrdom 
was  given;  and  eulogies  were  pronounced.  "The  day 
closed  with  an  open  banquet  in  which  all  the  worshipers 
were  invited  to  partake.  The  wealthy  heathen  had  been 
accustomed  to  propitiate  the  manes  of  their  departed  friends 
by  these  costly  festivals  ;  the  banquet  was  almost  an  integral 
part  of  the  heathen  religious  ceremony.  The  custom  passed 
into  the  church  ;  and  with  the  pagan  feeling,  the  festival 

15  Id.  16  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  \  74,  par.  4. 

17  "  History  of  Christianity,"  par.  14. 


•O  <  S5-3 

?  S"  2  «  S.  -M 

iii^i> 

•als-^ 


i-|Sj?j 


D"J    a' S'  b»  B* 

o  o  j*  P  5  a> 

«    *"^    j    ^'.Tn    w, 


B^->  •,.  y?  rv.f ?^"^swr 

^  V-     "•    ^   '"  '  •  :   '£Ml.     S7~f    '    \j 

I 

fc-' 


.U  ^^^^iW^4 

&  ^V^^L  ^^rii*e^^..  ^..:.  &;Aa^i^.M\^.-^:.;Xq- 


o  o  a  N_h2 

Egego^g 

O3  ^    ^  3,  P    r^ 

^S.S'S'*  5- 


"2.  B  O    ip  P* 

Pi5';i 


a,  2.  s  to 


&&*j 


HEATHEN  PRACTICES  IN  THE   CHURCH.  509 

assumed  a  pagan  character  of  gayety  and  joyous  excitement, 
and  even  of  luxury.  In  some  places  the  confluence  of 
worshipers  was  so  great  that,  as  in  the  earlier  and  indeed 
the  more  modern  religions  of  Asia,  the  neighborhood  of 
the  more  celebrated  churches  of  the  martyrs  became  marts 
for  commerce,  and  fairs  were  established  on  those  holidays. 

"As  the  evening  drew  in,  the  solemn  and  religious 
thoughts  gave  way  to  other  emotions ;  the  wine  flowed 
freely,  and  the  healths  of  the  martyrs  were  pledged,  not 
unfrequently,  to  complete  inebriety.  All  the  luxuries  of  the 
Roman  banquet  were  imperceptibly  introduced.  Dances 
were  admitted,  pantomimic  spectacles  were  exhibited,  the 
festivals  were  prolonged  till  late  in  the  evening,  or  to  mid- 
night, so  that  other  criminal  irregularities  profaned,  if  not 
the  sacred  edifice,  its  immediate  neighborhood.  The  bishops 
had  for  some  time  sanctioned  these  pious  hilarities  with 
their  presence;  they  had  freely  partaken  of  the  banquets." 
—  Milman.1* 

So  perfectly  were  the  pagan  practices  duplicated  in  these 
festivals  of  the  martyrs,  that  the  Catholics  were  charged 
with  practicing  pagan  rites,  with  the  only  difference  that 
they  did  it  apart  from  the  pagans.  This  charge  was  made 
to  Augustine:  "You  have  substituted  your  Agapse  for  the 
sacrifices  of  the  pagans  ;  for  their  idols  your  martyrs,  whom 
you  serve  with  the  very  same  honors.  You  appease  the 
shades  of  the  dead  with  wines  and  feasts  :  you  celebrate  the 
solemn  festivals  of  the  Gentiles,  their  calends  and  their 
solstices ;  and  as  to  their  manners,  those  you  have  retained 
without  any  alteration.  Nothing  distinguishes  you  from  the 
pagans  except  that  you  hold  your  assemblies  apart  from 
them." — Draper.19  And  the  only  defense  that  Augustine 
could  make  was  in  a  blundering  casuistical  effort  to  show  a 
distinction  in  the  nature  of  the  two  forms  of  worship. 

In  the  burial  of  their  dead,  they  still  continued  the  pagan 
practice  of  putting  a  piece  of  money  in  the  mouth  of  the 

18  Id.,  par.  15,  16. 

19 "  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  Vol.  i,  chap,  x,  par.  5. 


510  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

corpse  with  which  the  departed  was  to  pay  the  charges  of 
Charon  for  ferrying  him  over  the  River  Styx.20 

Another  most  prolific  source  of  general  corruption  was 
the  church's  assumption  of  authority  to  regulate,  and  that 
by  law,  the  whole  question  of  the  marriage  relation,  both  in 
the  Church  and  in  the  State.  "The  first  aggression  .  .  . 
which  the  Church  made  on  the  State,  was  assuming  the 
cognizance  over  all  questions  and  causes  relating  to  mar- 
riage. "  •  —  Milma/n,.*1 

Among  the  clergy  she  attempted  to  enforce  celibacy, 
that  is,  to  prohibit  marriage  altogether.  Monkery  had 
arisen  to  a  perfect  delirium  of  popularity,  and  "  a  character- 
istic trait  of  monasticism  in  all  its  forms  is  a  morbid  aversion 
to  female  society,  and  a  rude  contempt  of  married  life.  .  .  . 
Among  the  rules  of  Basil  is  a  prohibition  of  speaking  with  a 
woman,  touching  one,  or  even  looking  on  one,  except  in 
unavoidable  cases."  —  Schaff.™  As  monkery  was  so  uni- 
versally and  so  extremely  popular  among  all  classes  from 
the  height  of  imperial  dignity  to  the  depths  of  the  monkish 
degradation  itself,  it  became  necessary  for  the  clergy  to 
imitate  the  monks  in  order  to  maintain  popularity  with  the 
people.  And  as  monkery  is  only  an  ostentatious  display  of 
self-righteousness,  the  contempt  of  married  life  was  the 
easiest  way  for  the  clergy  to  advertise  most  loudly  their 
imitation  of  monkish  virtue. 

In  their  self-righteousness  some  of  the  monks  attained  to 
such  a  "pre-eminence"  of  "virtue"  that  they  could  live 
promiscuously  with  women,  or  like  Jerome,  write  "letters 
to  a  virgin,"  that  were  unfit  to  be  written  to  a  harlot.  The 
former  class,  in  the  estimation  of  an  admirer,  "bore  away 
the  pre-eminence  from  all  others. "  His  account  of  them  is 
as  follows  :  — 

"  There  are  persons  who,  when  by  virtue  they  have  attained  to  a 
condition  exempt  from  passion,  return  to  the  world.  In  the  midst  of  the 

20Milmatfs  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  ii,  par.   13,  note. 

ai  Id.,  book  iv,  chap.  1,  par.  58. 

28  "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  32,  par.  15. 


MONKISH  VIRTUE  MADE  PREVALENT.  5H 

stir,  by  plainly  intimating  that  they  are  indifferent  to  those  who  view 
them  with  amazement,  they  thus  trample  underfoot  vain-glory,  the  last 
garment,  according  to  the  wise  Plato,  which  it  is  the  nature  of  the  soul 
to  cast  off.  By  similar  means  they  study  the  art  of  apathy  in  eating, 
practising  it  even,  if  need  be,  with  the  petty  retailers  of  victuals.  They 
also  constantly  frequent  the  public  baths,  mostly  mingling  and  bathing 
with  women,  since  they  have  attained  to  such  au  ascendency  over  their 
passions,  as  to  possess  dominion  over  nature,  and  neither  by  s^ght,  touch, 
or  even  embracing  of  the  female,  to  relapse  into  their  natural  condition  ; 
it  being  their  desire  to  be  men  among  men,  and  women  among  women, 
and  to  participate  in  both  sexes.  In  short,  by  a  life  thus  all  excellent 
and  divine,  virtue  exercises  a  sovereignty  in  opposition  to  nature,  estab- 
lishing her  own  laws,  so  as  not  to  allow  them  to  partake  to  satiety  in  any 
necessary. " — Evagrius. 23 

The  first  decretal  ever  issued,  namely,  that  by  Pope  Siri- 
cius,  A.  D.  385,  commanded  the  married  clergy  to  separate 
from  their  wives  under  sentence  of  expulsion  from  the  cler- 
ical order  upon  all  who  dared  to  offer  resistance  ;  yet  promis- 
ing pardon  for  such  as  had  offended  through  ignorance,  and 
suffering  them  to  retain  their  positions,  provided  they  would 
observe  complete  separation  from  their  wives  —  though  even 
then  they  were  to  be  held  forever  incapable  of  promo- 
tion. The  clergy  finding  themselves  forbidden  by  the  pope 
to  marry,  and  finding  it  necessary,  in  order  to  maintain  a 
standing  of  popularity,  to  imitate  the  monks,  practiced  the 
same  sort  of  monkish  "  virtue "  as  described  above.  "The 
clerks  who  ought  to  instruct  and  awe  the  women  with  a  grave 
and  composed  behavior,  first  kiss  their  heads,  and  then 
stretching  out  their  hands  as  it  were  to  bestow  a  blessing, 
slyly  receive  a  fee  for  their  salutation.  The  women  in  the 
meantime,  elated  with  pride  in  feeling  themselves  thus 
courted  by  the  clergy,  prefer  tJ^  freedom  of  widowJiood  to 
the  subjection  attending  the  state  of  matrimony."'—  Jerome  ™ 

As  these  associations  differed  from  those  in  real  matri- 
mony "only  in  the  absence  of  the  marriage  ceremony,"  it 
was  not  an  uncommon  thing  for  men  to  gain  admission  to 
"holy  orders"  "on  account  of  the  superior  opportunities 

zs  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  i,  chap.  xxi. 

z*Quoied  by  Bower,  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  1*3. 


512  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

which  clericature  gave  of  improper  intercourse  with  women. " 
This  practice  became  so  scandalous  that  in  A.  D.  370  Yalen- 
tian  I  enacted  a  law  "which  denounced  severe  punishment 
on  ecclesiastics  who  visited  the  houses  of  widows  and  vir- 
gins."— Lea.*~a  The  law,  however,  had  really  no  effect  in 
stopping  the  wickedness,  and  "with  the  disappearance  of 
legitimate  marriage  in  the  priesthood,  the  already  prevalent 
vice  of  the  cohabitation  of  unmarried  ecclesiastics  with  pious 
widows  and  virgins  'secretly  brought  in,'  became  more  and 
more  common.  This  spiritual  marriage  which  had  become 
as  a  bold  ascetic  venture,  ended  only  too  often  in  the  flesh, 
and  prostituted  the  honor  of  the  church."  —  Schaff™ 

Again  :  in  accordance  with  the  rest  of  the  theocratical 
legislation  of  Constantine  and  the  bishops,  the  precepts  of 
the  Scripture  in  relation  to  marriage  and  divorce  were 
adopted  with  heavy  penalties,  as  the  laws  of  the  empire. 
As  the  church  had  assumed  "cognizance  over  all  questions 
relating  to  marriage,"  it  followed  that  marriage  not  cele- 
brated by  the  church  was  held  to  be  but  little  better  than  an 
illicit  connection.  Yet  the  weddings  of  the  church  were 
celebrated  in  the  pagan  way.  Loose  hymns  were  sung  to 
Yenus,  and  "  the  bride  was  borne  by  drunken  men  to  her 
husband's  house  among  choirs  of  dancing  harlots  with  pipes, 
and  flutes,  and  songs  of  offensive  license."  And  when  the 
marriage  had  been  thus  celebrated,  and  even  consummated, 
the  marriage  bond  was  held  so  loosely  that  it  amounted  to 
very  little,  for  "men  changed  their  wives  as  quickly  as  their 
clothes,  and  marriage  chambers  were  set  up  as  easily  as 
booths  in  a  market."  —  Milman.21 

Of  course  there  were  against  all  these  evils,  laws  abun- 
dant with  penalties  terrible,  as  in  the  days  of  the  Caesars. 
And  also  as  in  those  days  the  laws  were  utterly  impotent : 
not  only  for  the  same  great  reason  that  then  existed,  that 
the  iniquity  was  so  prevalent  that  there  were  none  to  enforce 

25 "History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy,"  chap,  v,  par.  17,  and  chap,  iv,  par.  7. 

26  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  iii,  §  50,  par.  8. 

27  "History  of  Christianity,"  book  iv.  chap,  i,  par.  58,  note^  and  60. 


HYPOCRISY  AND  FRAUD  MADE  HABITUAL.          513 

the  laws  ;  but  for  an  additional  reason  that  now  existed,  that 
is,  tJie  bishops  were  the  interpreters  of  the  code,  and  by  this 
time  through  the  interminable  and  hair-splitting  distinctions 
drawn  against  heresies,  the  bishops  had  so  sharpened  their 
powers  of  interpretation  that  they  could  easily  evade  the 
force  of  any  law,  scriptural,  canonical,  or  statutory  that  might 
be  produced. 

There  is  yet  one  other  element  of  general  corruption  to 
be  noticed.  As  we  have  seen,  the  means  employed  by 
Constantine  in  establishing  the  Catholic  religion  and  church, 
and  in  making  that  the  prevalent  religion,  were  such  as  to 
win  only  hypocrites.  This  was  bad  enough  in  itself,  yet  the 
hypocrisy  was  voluntary ;  but  when  through  the  agency  of 
her  Sunday  laws  and  by  the  ministration  of  Theodosius  the 
church  received  control  of  the  civil  power  to  compel  all 
without  distinction  who  were  not  Catholics  to  act  as  though 
they  were,  hypocrisy  was  made  compulsory  ;  and  every  per- 
son who  was  not  voluntarily  a  church-member  was  compelled 
either  to  be  a  hypocrite  or  a  rebel.  In  addition  to  this, 
those  who  were  of  the  church  indeed,  through  the  endless 
succession  of  controversies  and  church  councils,  were  forever 
establishing,  changing,  and  re-establishing  the  faith,  and  as 
all  were  required  to  change  or  revise  their  faith  according 
as  the  councils  decreed,  all  moral  and  spiritual  integrity  was 
destroyed.  Hypocrisy  became  a  habit,  dissimulation  and 
fraud  a  necessity  of  life,  and  the  very  moral  fiber  of  men 
and  of  society  was  vitiated. 

In  the  then  existing  order  of  things  it  was  impossible 
that  it  could  be  otherwise.  Right  faith  is  essential  to  right 
morals.  Purity  of  faith  is  essential  to  purity  of  heart  and 
life.  But  there  the  faith  was  wrong  and  utterly  corrupt, 
and  nothing  but  corruption  could  follow.  More  than  this, 
the  faith  was  essentially  pagan,  and  much  more  guilty  than 
had  been  the  original  pagan,  as  it  was  professed  under  the 
name  of  Christianity  and  the  gospel,  and  as  it  was  in  itself 
a  shameful  corruption  of  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel.  As 
the  faith  of  the  people  was  essentially  pagan,  or  rather  worse, 


514  THE  RUIN  OF   THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

the  morality  of  the  people  could  be  nothing  else.     And  such 
in  fact  it  was. 

"  There  is  ample  evidence  to  show  how  great  had  been 
the  reaction  from  the  simple  genuineness  of  early  Christian 
belief,  and  how  nearly  the  Christian  world  had  generally 
associated  itself,  in  thought  and  temper,  not  to  say  in  su- 
perstitious practice,  with  the  pagan.  We  must  not  shut  our 
eyes  to  the  fact  that  much  of  the  apparent  success  of  the  new 
religion  had  been  gained  by  its  actual  accommodation  of 
itself  to  the  ways  and  feelings  of  the  old.  It  was  natural 
it  should  be  so.  Once  set  aside,  from  doubt,  distaste,  €>r  any 
other  feeling,  the  special  dogmas  of  the  gospel,  .  .  .  and 
men  will  naturally  turn  to  compromise,  to  electicism,  to 
universalism,  to  indifference,  to  unbelief.  .  .  . 

' '  If  the  great  Christian  doctors  had  themselves  come 
forth  from  the  schools  of  the  pagans,  the  loss  had  not  been 
wholly  unrequited  ;  so  complacently  had  even  Christian 
doctors  again  surrendered  themselves  to  the  fascinations 
of  pagan  speculations ;  so  fatally,  in  their  behalf,  had 
they  extenuated  Christian  dogma,  and  acknowledged  the 
fundamental  truth  and  sufficiency  of  science  falsely  so 
called. 

"The  gospel  we  find  was  almost  eaten  out  from  the 
heart  of  the  Christian  society.  I  speak  not  now  of  the  pride 
of  spiritual  pretensions,  of  the  corruption  of  its  secular 
politics,  of  its  ascetic  extravagances,  its  mystical  fallacies, 
of  its  hollowness  in  preaching,  or  its  laxity  in  practice  ;  of  its 
saint  worship,  which  was  a  revival  of  hero-worship  ;  its 
addiction  to  the  sensuous  in  outward  service,  which  was  a 
revival  of  idolatry.  But  I  point  to  the  fact  less  observed  by 
our  church  historians,  of  the  absolute  defect  of  all  distinctive 
Christianity  in  the  utterances  of  men  of  the  highest  esteem 
as  Christians,  men  of  reputed  wisdom,  sentiment,  and  devo- 
tion. Look,  for  instance,  at  the  remains  we  possess  of  the 
Christian  Boethius,  a  man  whom  we  know  to  have  been  a 
professed  Christian  and  churchman,  excellent  in  action, 
steadfast  in  suffering,  but  in  whose  writings,  in  which  he 


PURE,    UNMINGLED  NATURALISM.  515 

aspires  to  set  before  us  the  true  grounds  of  spiritual  con- 
solation on  which  he  rested  himself  in  the  hour  of  his  trial, 
and  on  which  he  would  have  his  fellows  rest,  there  is  no 
trace  of  Christianity  whatever,  nothing  but  pure,  unmingled 
naturalism. 

"This  marked  decline  of  distinctive  Christian  belief  was 
accompanied  with  a  marked  decline  of  Christian  morality. 
Heathenism  re-asserted  its  empire  over  the  carnal  affections 
of  the  natural  man.  The  pictures  of  abounding  wickedness 
in  the  high  places  and  the  lew  places  of  the  earth,  which 
are  presented  to  us  by  the  witnesses  of  the  worst  pagan  deg- 
radation, are  repeated,  in  colors  not  less  strong,  in  lines 
not  less  hideous,  by  the  observers  of  the  gross  and  reckless 
iniquity  of  the  so-called  Christian  period  now  before  us.  It 
becomes  evident  that  as  the  great  mass  of  the  careless  and 
indifferent  have  assumed  witli  the  establishment  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  in  authority  and  honor,  the  outward  garb  and 
profession  of  Christian  believers,  so  with  the  decline  of 
belief,  the  corruption  of  the  visible  church,  the  same  masses, 
indifferent  and  irreligious  as  of  old,  have  rejected  the  moral 
restraints  which  their  profession  should  have  imposed  upon 
them. —  Merivale.™ 

In  short,  the  same  corruptions  that  had  characterized  the 
former  Home  were  reproduced  in  the  Rome  of  the  fifth  cent- 
ury. "The  primitive  rigor  of  discipline  and  manners  was 
utterly  neglected  and  forgotten  by  the  ecclesiastics  of  Rome. 
The  most  exhorbitant  luxury,  with  all  the  vices  attending  it, 
was  introduced  among  them,  and  the  most  scandalous  and 
unchristian  arts  of  acquiring  wealth  universally  practiced. 
They  seem  to  have  rivaled  in  riotous  living  the  greatest  epi- 
cures of  Pagan  Rome  when  luxury  was  there  at  the  highest 
pitch.  For  Jerome,  who  was  an  eye  witness  of  what  he 
writ,  reproaches  the  Roman  clergy  with  the  same  excesses 
which  the  poet  Juvenal  so  severely  censured  in  the  Roman 
nobility  under  the  reign  of  Domitian." — Bower.™ 

28  "  Conversion  of  the  Northern  Nations,"  Lecture  iv,  par.  10,  12,  13. 
39  41  History  of  the  Popes,"  Damasus,  par.  14. 


516  THE  RUIN  OF   TIIE  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

The  following  quotation,  though  touching  upon  some 
points  already  made,  gives  others  of  sufficient  value  to 
justify  its  insertion:  "The  mass  of  professing  believers 
were  found  to  relapse  into  the  grossest  superstitions  and 
practices  of  the  heathen.  .  .  .  The  old  heathen  cultus,  par- 
ticularly that  of  the  sun  (  Sol  invictus ),  had  formerly  en- 
twined itself  with  the  Christian  worship  of  God.  Many 
Christians,  before  entering  the  Basilica  of  Peter,  were  wont 
to  mount  the  platform,  in  order  to  make  their  obeisance  to 
the  rising  luminary.  Here  was  an  instance  of  the  way  in 
which  the  'spirit  of  paganism,'  had  found  means  of  in- 
sinuating itself  into  the  very  heart  of  Christianity.  Leo 
could  say,  with  no  great  exaggeration,  in  looking  at  the 
moral  position  of  the  Roman  Christians,  '  Quod  temporibus 
nostris  auctore  diabolo  sic  vitiata  sunt  omnia,  ut  fere  nihil  sit 
quod  absque  idololatria  transigatur '  [  In  our  time,  by  the 
instigation  of  the  devil,  all  things  have  become  so  corrupt 
that  there  is  hardly  anything  that  is  done  without  idolatry]. 
The  weddings  of  the  Christians  could  not  be  distinguished 
from  those  of  the  pagans.  Everything  was  determined  by 
auguries  and  auspices  ;  the  wild  orgies  of  the  "Bacchanalians, 
with  all  their  obscene  songs  and  revelry,  were  not  wanting." 
—  Merivale.™ 

And  now  all  the  evils  engendered  in  that  evil  intrigue 
which  united  the  State  with  a  professed  Christianity,  hur- 
ried on  the  doomed  empire  to  its  final  and  utter  ruin. 
"The  criminal  and  frivolous  pleasures  of  a  decrepit  civiliza- 
tion left  no  thought  for  the  absorbing  duties  of  the  day  or 
the  fearful  trials  of  the  morrow.  Unbridled  lust  and  unblush- 
ing indecency  admitted  no  sanctity  in  the  marriage  tie.  The 
rich  and  powerful  established  harems,  in  the  recesses  of 
which  their  wives  lingered,  forgotten,  neglected,  and  de- 
spised. The  banquet,  theater,  and  the  circus  exhausted 
what  little  strength  and  energy  were  left  by  domestic  ex- 
cesses. The  poor  aped  the  vices  of  the  rich,  and  hideous 

30  "Conversion  of  the  Northern  Nations,"  notes  and  illustrations,  E. 


DESTRUCTION  AND  DEVASTATION.  517" 

depravity  reigned  supreme,  and  invited  the  vengeance  of 
heaven.  — Lea.31 

The  pagan  superstitions,  the  pagan  delusions,  and  the 
pagan  vices,  which  had  been  brought  into  the  church  by 
the  apostasy,  and  clothed  with  a  form  of  godliness,  had 
wrought  such  corruption  that  the  society  of  which  it  was  a 
part  could  no  longer  exist.  From  it  no  more  good  could 
possibly  come,  and  it  must  be  swept  away.  "The  uncon- 
trollable progress  of  avarice,  prodigality,  voluptuousness, 
theater  going,  intemperance,  lewdness  ;  in  short,  of  all  the 
heathen  vices,  which  Christianity  had  come .  to  eradicate, 
still  carried  the  Koman  empire  and  people  with  rapid  strides 
toward  dissolution,  and  gave  it  at  last  into  the  hands  of  the 
rude,  but  simple  and  morally  vigorous,  barbarians."  — 
Schaff.™ 

And  onward  those  barbarians  came,  swiftly  and  in  multi- 
tudes. For  a  hundred  years  the  dark  cloud  had  been  hang- 
ing threateningly  over  the  borders  of  the  empire,  encroach- 
ing slightly  upon  the  West  and  breaking  occasionally  upon 
the  East.  But  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  the  tem- 
pest burst  in  all  its  fury,  and  the  flood  was  flowing  ruin- 
ously. As  early  as  A.  D.  377  a  million  Goths  had  crossed 
the  Danube,  and  between  that  time  and  A.  D.  400  they  had 
ravaged  the  country  from  Thessalonica  to  the  Adriatic  Sea. 
In  A.  D.  400  a  host  of  them  entered  the  borders  of  Italy,  but 
were  restrained  for  a  season. 

In  406  a  band  of  Burgundians,  Vandals,  Suevi,  and 
Alani  from  the  north  of  Germany,  four  hundred  thousand 
strong,  overran  the  country  as  far  as  Florence.  In  the 
siege  of  that  city  their  course  was  checked  with  the  loss  of 
more  than  one  hundred  thousand.  They  then  returned  to 
Germany,  and  with  large  accessions  to  their  numbers,  over- 
ran all  the  southern  part  of  Gaul.  The  Burgundians  re- 
mained in  Gaul ;  the  Vandals,  the  Alani,  and  the  Suevi 

31  "History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy,"  chap.  v.  par.  20. 

32  "History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  3,  §  23,  par.  2. 


518  THE  RUIN  OF   TUB  ROMAN  EMPIRE. 

overran  all  the  southern  part  of  Spain,  and  carried  their 
ravages  over  the  greater  part  of  that  province,  and  clear  to 
the  Strait  of  Gibraltar. 

In  410  again  returned  the  mighty  hosts  of  the  Goths, 
and  spread  over  all  Italy  from  the  Alps  to  the  Strait  of 
Sicily,  and  for  five  days  inflicted  upon  Rome  such  pillage  as 
had  never  befallen  it  since  the  day,  nearly  a  thousand  years 
before,  when  the  Cimbri  left  it  in  ruins.  They  marched  out 
of  Italy  and  took  possession  of  Southwestern  Gaul  from  the 
Mediterranean  Sea  to  the  Bay  of  Biscay. 

In  May  429,  the  Vandals,  in  whose  numbers  the  Alani 
had  been  absorbed,  crossed  the  Strait  of  Gibraltar'  into 
Africa,  and  for  ten  years  ravaged  the  country  from  there  to 
Carthage,  of  which  city  they  took  possession  with  great 
slaughter,  October  9,  A.  D.  439  ;  and  in  440  the  terrible 
Genseric,  king  of  the  Vandals,  ruled  the  Mediterranean  and 
sacked  the  city  of  Rome. 

In  449  the  Saxons  and  their  German  neighbors  invaded 
Britain,  of  which  they  soon  became  sole  possessors,  utterly 
exterminating  the  native  inhabitants. 

In  451-3  another  mighty  host,  numbering  seven  hundred 
thousand,  of  all  the  barbarous  nations,  led  by  Attila,  deso- 
lated Eastern  Gaul  as  far  as  Chalons,  and  the  north  of  Italy 
as  far  as  the  Rhone,  but  returned  again  beyond  the  Danube. 

And  finally,  in  476,  when  Odoacer,  king  of  the  Heruli, 
became  king  of  Italy,  the  last  vestige  of  the  Western  empire 
of  Rome  was  gone,  and  was  divided  among  the  ten  nations 
of  barbarians  of  the  North. 

Wherever  these  savages  went,  they  carried  fire  and 
slaughter,  and  whenever  they  departed,  they  left  desolation 
and  ruin  in  their  track,  and  carried  away  multitudes  of  cap- 
tives. Thus  was  the  proud  empire  of  Western  Rome  swept 
from  the  earth  ;  and  that  which  Constantino  and  his  ecclesi- 
astical flatterers  had  promised  one  another  should  be  the 
everlasting  salvation  of  the  State,  proved  its  speedy  and 
everlasting  ruin. 


NO  REMEDY,   AND  FINAL  RUIN.  519 

It  was  impossible  that  it  should  be  otherwise.  We  have 
seen  to  what  a  fearful  depth  of  degradation  Pagan  Rome 
had  gone  in  the  days  of  the  Caesars,  yet  the  empire  did  not 
perish  then.  There  was  hope  for  the  people.  The  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ  carried  in  earnestness,  in  simplicity,  and  in 
its  heavenly  power,  brought  multitudes  to  its  saving  light, 
and  to  a  knowledge  of  the  purity  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  was 
their  salvation  ;  and  the  gospel  of  Christ,  by  restoring  the 
virtue  and  integrity  of  the  individual,  was  the  preservation 
of  the  Roman  State. 

But  when  by  apostasy  that  gospel  had  lost  its  purity  and 
its  power  in  the  multitudes  who  professed  it  ;  and  when  it 
was  used  only  as  a  cloak  to  cover  the  same  old  pagan  wick- 
edness ;  when  this  form  of  godliness,  practiced  not  only 
without  the  power  but  in  defiance  of  it,  permeated  the  great 
masses  of  the  people,  and  the  empire  had  thereby  become  a 
festering  mass  of  corruption  ;  when  the  only  means  which 
it  was  possible  for  the  Lord  himself  to  employ  to  purify  the 
people,  had  been  taken  and  made  only  the  cloak  under 
which  to  increase  unto  more  ungodliness, —  there  was  no 
other  remedy  :  destruction  must  come. 

And  it  did  come,  as  we  have  seen,  by  a  host  wild  and 
savage,  it  is  true  ;  but  whose  social  habits  were  so  far  above 
those  of  the  people  which  they  destroyed,  that  savage  as 
they  were,  they  were  caused  fairly  to  blush  at  the  shameful 
corruptions  which  they  found  in  this  so-called  Christian 
society  of  Rome.  This  is  proved  by  the  best  authority.  A 
writer  who  lived  at  the  time  of  the  barbarian  invasions  and 
who  wrote  as  a  Christian,  gives  the  following  evidence  as  to 
the  condition  of  things  :  — 

"  '  The  church  which  ought  everywhere  to  propitiate  God,  what  does 
she,  but  provoke  him  to  anger  ?  How  many  may  one  meet,  even  in  the 
church,  who  are  not  still  drunkards,  or  debauchees,  or  adulterers,  or 
fornicators,  or  robbers,  or  murderers,  or  the  like,  or  all  these  at  once, 
without  end  ?  It  is  even  a  sort  of  holiness  among  Christian  people,  to 
be  less  vicious.'  From  the  public  worship  of  God.  and  almost  during  it, 
4O 


520  THE  FALL   OF  THE  EMPIRE. 

they  pass  to  deeds  of  shame.  Scarce  a  rich  man  but  would  commit  mur- 
der and  fornication.  We  have  lost  the  whole  power  of  Christianity,  and 
offend  God  the  more,  that  we  sin  as  Christians.  We  are  worse  than  the 
barbarians  and  heathen.  If  the  Saxon  is  wild,  the  Frank  faithless,  the 
Goth  inhuman,  the  Alanian  drunken,  the  Hun  licentious,  they  are,  by 
reason  of  their  ignorance,  far  less  punishable  than  we,  who,  knowing 
the  commandments  of  God,  commit  all  these  crimes." — SalDian.33 

' '  He  compares  the  Christians,  especially  of  Rome,  with 
the  Arian  Goths  and  Yandals,  to  the  disparagement  of  the 
Romans,  who  add  to  the  gross  sins  of  nature  the  refined 
vices  of  civilization,  passion  for  the  theaters,  debauchery, 
and  unnatural  lewdness.  Therefore  has  the  just  God  given 
them  into  the  hands  of  the  barbarians,  and  exposed  them 
to  the  ravages  of  the  migrating  hordes."-—  Scliaff.^ 

And  this  description,  says  the  same  author,  "is  in  gen- 
eral not  untrue.''1  And  he  confirms  it  in  his  own  words  by 
the  excellent  observation  that  "nothing  but  the  divine  judg- 
ment of  destruction  upon  this  nominally  Christian,  but  essen- 
tially heathen,  world,  could  open  the  way  for  the  moral 
regeneration  of  society.  There  must  be  new,  fresh  nations, 
if  the  Christian  civilization,  prepared  in  the  old  Roman  em- 
pire, was  to  take  firm  root  and  bear  ripe  fruit." — Schaff™ 

These  new,  fresh  nations  came,  and  planted  themselves 
upon  the  ruins  of  the  old.  Out  of  these  came  the  faithful 
Christians  of  the  Dark  Ages,  and  upon  them  broke  the  light 
of  the  Reformation.  And  out  of  these  and  by  this  means 
God  produced  the  civilization  of  the  nineteenth  century  and 
the  new  republic  of  the  United  States  of  America^  from  which 
there  should  go  once  more  in  its  purity,  as  in  the  beginning, 
the  everlasting  gospel  to  every  nation  and  kindred  and 
tongue  and  people. 

33  Quoted  by  Schafl,  Id.,  \  12,  par.  3. 

35  Id.  \  24,  par.  2.  3*  Id. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

AS  out  of  the  political  difficulties  of  the  days  of  Constan- 
tino, the  Catholic  Church  rose  to  power  in  the  State  ;  so 
out  of  the  ruin  of  the  Roman  empire  she  rose  to  supremacy 
over  kings  and  nations.  She  had  speedily  wrought  the  ruin 
of  one  empire,  and  now  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  she 
would  prove  a  living  curse  to  all  the  States  and  empires 
that  should  succeed  it. 

We  have  seen  how  that,  by  the  arrogant  ministry  of  Leo, 
the  bishop  of  Rome  was  made  the  fountain  of  faith,  and  was 
elevated  to  a  position  of  dignity  and  authority  that  the  aspir- 
ing prelacy  had  never  before  attained.  For  Leo,  as  the  typ- 
ical pope,  was  one  whose  "  ambition  knew  no  bounds  ;  and 
to  gratify  it,  he  stuck  at  nothing ;  made  no  distinction  be- 
tween right  and  wrong,  between  truth  and  falsehood  ;  as  if 
he  had  adopted  the  famous  maxim  of  Julius  Caesar, — 

Be  just,  unless  a  kingdom  tempts  to  break  the  laws, 
For  sovereign  power  alone  can  justify  the  cause,' 

or  thought  the  most  criminal  actions  ceased  to  be  criminal, 
and  became  meritorious,  when  any  ways  subservient  to  the 
increase  of  his  power  or  the  exaltation  of  his  see." — Bower.1 
Nor  was  the  force  of  any  single  point  of  his  example  ever 
lost  upon  his  successors.  His  immediate  successor, — 

HILARY,  4(51-467, 

was  so  glad  to  occupy  the  place  which  had  been  made  so 
large  by  Leo,  that  shortly  after  his  election  he  wrote  a  letter 

lu  History  of  the  Popes,"  Leo,  last  par.  but  one. 

[521] 


522       THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

to  the  other  bishops  asking  them  to  exult  with  him,  taking 
particular  care  in  the  letter  to  tell  them  that  he  did  not 
doubt  that  they  all  knew  what  respect  and  deference  was 
paid  "in  the  Spirit  of  God  to  St.  Peter  and  his  see."  The 
bishops  of  Spain  addressed  him  as  "the  successor  of 
St.  Peter,  whose  primacy  ought  to  be  loved  and  feared  by 
all."  He  was  succeeded  by — 

SIMPLICIUS,  467-4:83, 

in  whose  pontificate  the  empire  perished  when  the  Heruli, 
under  Odoacer,  overran  all  Italy,  deposed  the  last  emperor  of 
the  "West,  appropriated  to  themselves  one  third  of  all  the 
lands,  and  established  the  Herulian  kingdom,  with  Odoacer 
as  king  of  Italy.  In  fact,  the  more  the  imperial  power 
faded,  and  the  nearer  the  empire  approached  its  fall,  the 
more  rapidly  and  the  stronger  grew  the  papal  assumptions. 
Thus  the  very  calamities  which  rapidly  wrought  the  ruin  of 
the  empire,  and  which  were  hastened  by  the  union  of  Church 
and  State,  were  turned  to  the  advantage  of  the  bishopric  of 
Rome.  During  the  whole  period  of  barbarian  invasions 
from  400  to  476,  the  Catholic  hierarchy  everywhere  adapted 
itself  to  the  situation,  and  reaped  power  and  influence  from 
the  calamities  that  were  visited  everywhere. 

We  have  seen  that  Innocent  I,  upon  whose  mind  there 
appears  first  to  have  dawned  the  vast  conception  of  Rome's 
universal  ecclesiastical  supremacy,  during  the  invasion  of 
Italy  and  the  siege  of  Rome  by  Alaric,  headed  an  embassy 
to  the  emperer  to  mediate  for  a  treaty  of  peace  between  the 
empire  and  the  invading  Goths.  'We  have  seen  that  at  the 
moment  of  Leo's  election  to  the  papal  see,  he  was  absent  on 
a  like  mission  to  reconcile  the  enmity  of  the  two  principal 
Roman  officers,  which  was  threatening  the  safety  of  the 
empire.  Yet  other  and  far  more  important  occasions  of  the 
same  kind  fell  to  the  lot  of  Leo  during  the  term  of  his  bish- 
opric. In  453  Leo  was  made  the  head  of  an  embassy  to 
meet  Attila  as  he  was  on  his  way  to  Rome,  if  possible  to 


THE  PAPACY  AND    THE  BARBARIANS.  523 

turn  him  back.  The  embassy  was  successful ;  a  treaty  was 
formed ;  Attila  retired  beyond  the  Danube,  where  he  imme- 
diately died  ;  and  Italy  was  delivered.  This  redounded  no 
less  to  the  glory  of  Leo  than  any  of  the  other  remarkable 
things  which  he  had  accomplished.  He  was  not  so  suc- 
cessful with  Genseric  two  years  afterward,  yet  even  then  he 
succeeded  in  mitigating  the  ravages  of  the  Yandals,  which 
were  usually  so  dreadful  that  the  idea  still  lives  in  the 
word  "vandalism." 

Moreover,  it  was  not  against  religion  as  such  that  the 
barbarians  made  war,  as  they  themselves  were  religious. 
It  was  against  that  mighty  empire  of  which  they  had  seen 
much,  and  suffered  much,  and  heard  more,  that  they 
warred.  It  was  as  nations  taking  vengeance  upon  a  nation 
which  had  been  so  great,  arid  which  had  so  proudly  asserted 
lordship  over  all  other  nations,  that  they  invaded  the  Roman 
empire.  And  when  they  could  plant  themselves  and  remain, 
as  absolute  lords,  in  the  dominions  of  those  who  had  boasted 
of  absolute  and  eternal  dominion,  and  thus  humble  the  pride 
of  the  mighty  Rome,  this  was  their  supreme  gratification. 
As  these  invasions  were  not  inflicted  everywhere  at  once, 
but  at  intervals  through  a  period  of  seventy-five  years,  the 
church  had  ample  time  to  adapt  herself  to  the  ways  of  such 
of  the  barbarians  as  were  heathen,  which  as  ever  she 
readily  did.  The  heathen  barbarians  were  accustomed  to 
pay  the  greatest  respect  to  their  own  priesthood,  and  were 
willing  to  admit  the  Catholic  priesthood  to  an  equal  or 
even  a  larger  place  in  their  estimation.  Such  of  them  as 
were  already  professedly  Christian,  were  Arians,  and  not 
so  savage  as  the  Catholics  ;  therefore,  they,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Yandals,  were  not  so  ready  to  persecute,  and 
were  willing  to  settle  and  make  themselves  homes  in  the 
territories  of  the  vanished  empire. 

An  account  of  the  conversion  of  the  Burgundians,  and 
through  them  of  the  Franks,  will  illustrate  the  dealings  of 
the  papacy  with  the  barbarians,  and  will  also  give  the  key 


524       THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

to  the  most  important  events  in  the  history  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  bishopric  of  Rome. 

Ever  since  the  time  of  Constantine,  the  god  and  saviour  of 
the  Catholics  had  been  a  god  of  battle,  and  no  surer  way  to 
the  eternal  rewards  of  martyrdom  could  be  taken  than  by 
being  killed  in  a  riot  in  behalf  of  the  orthodox  faith,  or  to 
die  by  punishment  inflicted  for  such  proceeding,  as  in  the 
case  of  that  insolent  ruffian  who  attempted  to  murder 
Orestes.  It  was  easy,  therefore,  for  the  heathen  barbarians, 
whose  greatest  god  was  the  god  of  battle,  and  whose  greatest 
victory  and  surest  passport  to  the  halls  of  the  warrior  god, 
was  to  die  in  the  midst  of  the  carnage  of  bloody  battle, —  it 
was  easy  for  such  people  as  this  to  become  converted  to  the 
god  of  battle  of  the  Catholics.  A  single  bloody  victory  would 
turn  the  scale,  and  issue  in  the  conversion  of  a  whole  nation. 

The  Burgundians  were  settled  in  that  part  of  Gaul  which 
now  forms  Western  Switzerland  and  that  part  of  France 
which  is  now  the  county  and  district  of  Burgundy.  As 
early  as  A.  D.  430,  the  Huns  making  inroads  into  Gaul, 
severely  afflicted  the  Burgundians,  who  finding  impotent  the 
power  of  their  own  god,  determined  to  try  the  Catholic  god. 
They  therefore  sent  representatives  to  a' neighboring  city  in 
Gaul,  requesting  the  Catholic  bishop  to  receive  them.  The 
bishop  had  them  fast  for  a  week,  during  which  time  he  cate- 
chised them,  and  then  baptized  them.  Soon  afterward  the 
Burgundians  found  the  Huns  without  a  leader,  and,  sud- 
denly falling  upon  them  at  the  disadvantage,  confirmed  their 
conversion  by  the  slaughter  of  ten  thousand  of  the  enemy. 
Thereupon  the  wrhole  nation  embraced  the  Catholic  religion 
"with  fiery  zeal." — JMfilman.*  Afterward,  however,  when 
about  the  fall  of  the  empire,  the  Visigoths  under  Euric  as- 
serted their  dominion  over  all  Spain,  and  the  greater  part  of 
Gaul,  and  over  the  Burgundians  too,  they  deserted  the 
Catholic  god,  and  adopted  the  Arian  faith. 


2  "History  of   Latiu    Christiauty,"  book    ii,  chap,    ii,  par.  21  ;    Socrates's 
"Ecclesiastical  History,"  book  vii,  chap.  xxx. 


THE  "CONVERSION"   OF  CLOVI8.  525 

Yet  Clotilda,  a  niece  of  the  Burgundian  king,  "was  edu- 
cated "  in  the  profession  of  the  Catholic  faith.  She  married 
Clovis,  the  pagan  king  of  the  pagan  Franks,  and  strongly 
persuaded  him  to  become  a  Catholic.  All  her  pleadings  were 
in  vain,  however,  till  A.  D.  496,  when  in  a  great  battle 
with  the  Alemanni,  the  Franks  were  getting  the  worst  of  the 
conflict,  in  the  midst  of  the  battle  Clovis  vowed  that  if  the 
victory  could  be  theirs,  he  would  become  a  Catholic.  The 
tide  of  battle  turned ;  the  victory  was  won,  and  Clovis 
was  a  Catholic.  Clotilda  hurried  away  a  messenger  with 
the  glad  news  to  the  bishop  of  Rhiems,  who  came  to  baptize 
the  new  convert. 

But  after  the  battle  was  over,  and  the  dangerous  crisis 
was  past,  Clovis  was  not  certain  whether  he  wanted  to  be  a 
Catholic.  He  said  he  must  consult  his  warriors  ;  he  did  so, 
and  they  signified  their  readiness  to  adopt  the  same  religion 
as  their  king.  He  then  declared  that  he  was  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  the  Catholic  faith,  and  preparations  were  at 
once  made  for  the  baptism  of  the  new  Constantine,  Christ- 
mas day,  A.  D.  496.  "To  impress  the  minds  of  the  barbari- 
ans, the  baptismal  ceremony  was  performed  with  the  utmost 
pomp.  The  church  was  hung  with  embroidered  tapestry 
and  white  curtains  ;  odors  of  incense  like  airs  of  paradise, 
were  diffused  around  ;  the  building  blazed  with  countless 
lights.  When  the  new  Constantine  knelt  in  the  font  to  be 
cleansed  from  the  leprosy  of  his  heathenism,  'Fierce  Sicam- 
brian,'.said  the  bishop,  '  bow  thy  neck  ;  burn  what  thou  hast 
adored,  adore  what  thou  hast  burned.'  Three  thousand 
Franks  followed  the  example  of  Clovis." — Milman.3 

The  pope  sent  Clovis  a  letter  congratulating  him  on  his 
conversion.  As  an  example  of  the  real  value  of  his  relig- 
ious instruction,  it  may  be  well  to  state  that  some  time  after 
his  baptism,  the  bishop  delivered  a  sermon  on  the  crucifixion 
of  the  Saviour  ;  and  while  he  dwelt  upon  the  cruelty  of  the 
Jewrs  in  that  transaction,  Clovis  blurted  out,  "If  I  had  been 
there  with  my  faithful  Franks,  they  would  not  have  dared  to 

3  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  ii,  par.  27. 


526  THE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE  PAPACY. 

do  it."  "If  unscrupulous  ambition,  undaunted  valor  and 
enterprise,  and  desolating  warfare,  had  been  legitimate 
means  for  the  propagation  of  pure  Christianity,  it  could  not 
have  found  a  better  champion  than  Clovis.  For  the  first 
time  the  diffusion  of  belief  in  the  nature  of  the  Godhead 
became  the  avowed  pretext  for  the  invasion  of  a  neighboring 
territory." — Milman,*  "His  ambitious  reign  was  a  per- 
petual violation  of  moral  and  Christian  duties  ;  his  hands 
were  stained  with  blood  in  peace  as  well  as  in  war ;  and 
as  soon  as  Clovis  had  dismissed  a  synod  of  the  Gallican 
church,  he  calmly  assassinated  all  the  princes  of  the  Mero- 
vingian race."--  Gibbon* 

The  bishop  of  Yienne  also  sent  a  letter  to  the  new  con- 
vert, in  which  he  prophesied  that  the  faith  of  Clovis  would 
be  a  surety  of  the  victory  of  the  Catholic  faith  ;  and  he, 
with  every  other  Catholic  in  Christendom,  was  ready  to  do 
his  utmost  to  see  that  the  prophecy  was  fulfilled.  The 
Catholics  in  all  the  neighboring  countries  longed  and  prayed 
and  conspired  that  Clovis  might  deliver  them  from  the  rule 
of  Arian  monarchs  ;  and  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  war 
soon  followed.  Burgundy  was  the  first  country  invaded. 
Before  the  war  actually  began,  however,  by  the  advice  of  the 
bishop  of  Rhiems,  a  synod  of  the  orthodox  bishops  met  at 
Lyons  ;  then  with  the  bishop  of  Yienne  at  their  head,  they 
visited  the  king  of  the  Burgundians,  and  proposed  that  he 
call  the  Arian  bishops  together,  and  allow  a  conference  to  be 
held,  as  they  were  prepared  to  prove  that  the  Arians  were  in 
error.  To  their  proposal  the  king  replied,  "  If  yours"  be  the 
true  doctrine,  why  do  you  not  prevent  the  king  of  the  Franks 
from  waging  an  unjust  war  against  me,  and  from  caballing 
with  my  enemies  against  me?  There  is  no  true  Christian 
faith  where  there  is  rapacious  covetousness  for  the  posses- 
sions of  others,  and  thirst  for  blood.  Let  him  show  forth  hi? 
faith  by  his  good  works." — Milman* 

*Id.  par.  28.  6"  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxviii,  par.  6. 

6 "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap.  Li,  par.  28. 


THE  "HOLT"    WARS  OF  CLOVIS.  527 

The  bishop  of  Vienne  dodged  this  pointed  question,  and 
replied,  "We  are  ignorant  of  the  motives  and  intentions  of 
the  king  of  the  Franks ;  but  we  are  taught  by  the  Scripture 
that  the  kingdoms  which  abandon  the  divine  law,  are  fre- 
quently subverted  ;  and  that  enemies  will  arise  on  every  side 
against  those  who  have  made  God  their  enemy.  Eeturn 
with  thy  people  to  the  law  of  God,  and  he  will  give  peace 
and  security  to  thy  dominions."-  -  Gibbon.7  War  followed, 
and  the  Burgundian  dominions  were  made  subject  to  the 
rule  of  Clovis,  A.  D.  500. 

The  Visigoths  possessed  all  the  southwestern  portion  of 
Gaul.  They  too  were  Arians  ;  and  the  mutual  conspiracy 
of  the  Catholics  in  the  Gothic  dominions,  and  the  crusade  of 
the  Franks  from  the  side  of  Clovis,  soon  brought  on  another 
holy  war.  At  the  assembly  of  princes  and  warriors  at 
Paris,  A.  D.  508,  Clovis  complained,  "It  grieves  me  to  see 
that  the  Arians  still  possess  the  fairest  portion  of  Gaul. 
Let  us  march  against  them  with  the  aid  of  God  ;  and,  hav- 
ing vanquished  the  heretics,  we  will  possess  and  divide  their 
fertile  province."  Clotilda  added  her  pious  exhortation  to 
the  effect  "that  doubtless  the  Lord  would  more  readily  lend 
his  aid  if  some  gift  were  made  ; "  and  in  response,  Clovis 
seized  his  ba-ttle-ax  and  threw  it  as  far  as  he  could,  and  as  it 
went  whirling  through  the  air,  he  exclaimed,  "There,  on 
that  spot  where  my  Francesca  shall  fall,  will  I  erect  a 
church  in  honor  of  the  holy  apostles."  -  Gibbon? 

War  was  declared  ;  and  as  Clovis  marched  on  his  way, 
he  passed  through  Tours,  and  turned  aside  to  consult  the 
shrine  of  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  for  an  omen.  "His  messen- 
gers were  instructed  to  remark  the  words  of  the  Psalm 
which  should  happen  to  be  chanted  at  the  precise,  moment 
when  they  entered  the  church."  And  the  oracular  clergy 
took  care  that  the  words  which  he  should  "happen  "  to  hear 
at  that  moment  —  uttered  not  in  Latin,  but  in  language 
which  Clovis  understood  —  should  be  the  following  from 

7"Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxviii,  par.  8.  8 Id.,  par.  11. 


528  THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

Psalm  xviii :  "Thou  hast  girded  me,  O  Lord,  with  strength 
unto  the  battle  ;  thou  hast  subdued  unto  me  those  who  rose 
up  against  me.  Thou  hast  given  me  the  necks  of  mine 
enemies,  that  I  might  destroy  them  that  hate  me."  The 
oracle  was  satisfactory,  and  in  the  event  was  completely 
successful.  "The  Visigothic  kingdom  was  wasted  and  sub- 
dued by  the  remorseless  sword  of  the  Franks."--  Gibbon.* 

Nor  was  the  religious  zeal  of  Clovis  confined  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  Arians.  There  were  two  bodies  of  the  Franks, 
the  Salians  arid  the  Ripuarians.  Clovis  was  king  of  the 
Salians,  Sigebert  of  the  Ripuarians.  Clovis  determined  to 
be  king  of  all  ;  he  therefore  prompted  the  son  of  Sigebert  to 
assassinate  his  father,  with  the  promise  that  the  son  should 
peaceably  succeed  Sigebert  on  the  throne  ;  but  as  soon  as 
the  murder  was  committed,  Clovis  commanded  the  murderer 
to  be  murdered,  and  then  in  a  full  parliament  of  the  whole 
people  of  the  Franks,  he  solemnly  vowed  that  he  had  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  murder  of  either  the  father  or  the 
son  ;  and  upon  this,  as  there  was  no  heir,  Clovis  was  raised 
upon  a  shield,  and  proclaimed  king  of  the  RipUarian  Franks  ; 
—  all  of  which  Gregory,  bishop  of  Tours,  commended  as  the 
will  of  God,  saying  of  Clovis  that  "God  thus  daily  pros- 
trated his  enemies  under  his  hands,  and  enlarged  his  king- 
dom, because  he  walked  before  him  with  an  upright  heart, 
and  did  that  which  was  well  pleasing  in  his  sight." — 
Milman.™ 

Thus  was  the  bloody  course  of  Clovis  glorified, by  the 
Catholic  writers,  as  the  triumph  of  the  orthodox  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity  over  Arianism.  When  such  actions  as  these 
were  so  lauded  by  the  clergy  as  the  pious  acts  of  orthodox 
Catholics',  it  is  certain  that  the  clergy  themselves  were  no 
better  than  were  the  bloody  objects  of  their  praise.  Under 
the  influence  of  such  ecclesiastics,  the  condition  of  the  bar- 


9  Id.,  par.  12,  and  Milman's  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap, 
ii,  par.  29.  10  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  Id.,  par.  29. 


SUCH  CONVERSION  WAS   WORSE  CORRUPTION.      529 

barians  after  their  so-called  conversion,  could  not  possibly 
be  better,  even  if  it  were  not  worse  than  before.  To  be  con- 
verted to  the  principles  and  precepts  of  such  clergy  was  only 
the  more  deeply  to  be  damned.  In  proof  of  this  it  is  nec- 
essary only  to  touch  upon  the  condition  of  Catholic  France 
under  Clovis  and  his  successors. 

Into  the  "converted"  barbarians,  the  Catholic  system  in- 
stilled all  of  its  superstition,  and  its  bigoted  hatred  of 
heretics  and  unbelievers.  It  thus  destroyed  what  of  gener- 
osity still  remained  in  their  minds,  while  it  only  intensified 
their  native  ferocity  ;  and  the  shameful  licentiousness  of  the 
papal  system  likewise  corrupted  the  purity,  and  the  native 
respect  for  women  and  marriage  which  had  always  been  a 
noble  characteristic  of  the  German  nations.  "It  is  difficult 
to  conceive  a  more  dark  and  odious  state  of  society  than  that 
of  France  under  her  Merovingian  kings,  the  descendants  of 
Clovis,  as  described  by  Gregory  of  Tours.  .  .  .  Throughout, 
assassinations,  parricides,  and  fratricides  intermingle  with 
adulteries  and  rapes. 

' '  The  cruelty  might  seem  the  mere  inevitable  result  of 
this  violent  and  unnatural  fusion  ;  but  the  extent  to  which 
this  cruelty  spreads  throughout  the  whole  society  almost 
surpasses  belief.  That  king  Chlotaire  should  burn  alive  his 
rebellious  son  with  his  wife  and  daughter,  is  fearful  enough  ; 
but  we  are  astounded,  even  in  these  times,  that  a  bishop  of 
Tours  should  burn  a  man  alive  to  obtain  the  deeds  of  an 
estate  which  he  coveted.  Fredegonde  sends  two  murderers 
to  assassinate  Childebert,  and  these  assassins  are  clerks. 
She  causes  the  archbishop  of  Rouen  to  be  murdered  while  he 
is  chanting  the  service  in  the  church  ;  and  in  this  crime  a 
bishop  and  an  archdeacon  are  her  accomplices.  She  is  not 
content  with  open  violence  ;  she  administers  poison  with  the 
subtlety  of  a  Locusta  or  a  modern  Italian,  apparently  with 
no  sensual  design,  but  from  sheer  barbarity." 

"As  to  the  intercourse  of  the  sexes,  wars  of  conquest, 
where  the  females  are  at  the  mercy  of  the  victors,  especially 


530       THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

if  female  virtue  is  not  in  much  respect,  would  severely  try 
the  more  rigid  morals  of  the  conqueror.  The  strength  of 
the  Teutonic  character,  when  it  had  once  burst  the  bonds  of 
habitual  or  traditionary  restraint,  might  seem  to  disdain 
easy  and  effeminate  vice,  and  to  seek  a  kind  of  wild  zest  in 
the  indulgence  of  lust,  by  mingling  it  up  with  all  other  vio- 
lent passions,  rapacity  and  inhumanity.  Marriage  was  a 
bond  contracted  and  broken  on  the  slightest  occasion. 
Some  of  the  Merovingian  kings  took  as  many  wives,  either 
together  or  in  succession,  as  suited  either  their  passions  or 
their  politics." 

The  papal  religion  "hardly  interferes  even  to  interdict 
incest.  King  Chlotaire  demanded  for  the  fisc  the  third  part 
of  the  revenue  of  the  churches  ;  some  bishops  yielded ;  one, 
Injuriosus,  disdainfully  refused,  and  Chlotaire  withdrew  his 
demands.  Yet  Chlotaire,  seemingly  unrebuked,  married 
two  sisters  at  once.  Charibert  likewise  married  two  sisters  : 
he,  however,  found  a  churchman  —  but  that  was  Saint 
Germanus  —  bold  enough  to  rebuke  him.  This  rebuke  the 
king  (the  historian  quietly  writes),  as  he  had  already  many 
wives,  bore  with  patience.  Dagobert,  son  of  Chlotaire, 
king  of  Austrasia,  repudiated  his  wife  Gomatrude  for  barren- 
ness, married  a  Saxon  slave  Mathildis,  then  another,  Regna- 
trude  ;  so  that  he  had  three  wives  at  oilce,  besides  so  many 
concubines  that  the  chronicler  is  ashamed  to  recount  them. 
Brunehaut  and  Fredegonde  are  not  less  famous  for  their 
licentiousness  than  for  their  cruelty.  Fredegonde  is  either 
compelled,  or  scruples  not  of  her  own  accord,  to  take  a  pub- 
lic oath,  with  three  bishops  and  four  hundred  nobles  as  her 
vouchers,  that  her  son  was  the  son  of  her  husband  Chilperic. 
—  Milman.11  Thus  did  the  papacy  for  the  barbarians  whom 
she  "converted;"  and  such  as  she  could  not  thus  cor- 
rupt, she  destroyed. 

At  the  fall  of  the  empire,  the  bishopric  of  Rome  was  the 
head  and  center  of  a  strong  and  compactly  organized  power. 
And  by  deftly  insinuating  itself  into  the  place  of  mediator 

11  Id.,  par.  33,  34. 


SHE  DESTROYS   THOSE  SHE  CANNOT  CORRUPT.     531 

between  the  barbarian  invaders  and  the  perishing  imperial 
authority,  it  had  attained  a  position  where  it  was  recognized 
by  the  invaders  as  the  power  which,  though  it  claimed  to  be 
not  temporal  but  spiritual  was  none  the  less  real,  had  suc- 
ceeded to  the  place  of  the  vanished  imperial  authority  of 
Rome.  And  in  view  of  the  history  of  the  time,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  escape  the  conviction  that  in  the  bishopric  of  Rome 
there  was  at  this  time  formed  the  determination  to  plant 
itself  in  the  temporal  dominion  of  Rome  and  Italy.  The 
emperors  had  been  absent  from  Rome  so  long  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  had  assumed  their  place  there,  and  we  have 
seen  how  the  church  had  usurped  the  place  of  the  civil 
authority.  The  bishop  of  Rome  was  the  head  of  the 
church ;  and  now,  as  the  empire  was  perishing,  he  would 
exalt  his  throne  upon  its  ruins,  and  out  of  the  anarchy  of 
the  times  would  secure  a  place  and  a  name  among  the  pow- 
ers and  dominions  of  the  earth. 

The  barbarians  who  took  possession  of  Italy  were  Arians, 
which  in  the  sight  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  was  worse  than  all 
other  crimes  put  together.  In  addition  to  this,  the  Herulian 
monarch,  Odoacer,  an  Arian,  presumed  to  assert  civil 
authority  over  the  papacy,  which,  on  account  of  the  riotous 
proceedings  in  the  election  of  the  pope,  was  necessary,  but 
would  not  meekly  be  borne  by  the  proud  pontiffs.  At  the 
election  of  the  first  pope  after  the  fall  of  the  empire,  the 
representative  of  Odoacer  appeared  and  notified  the  assembly 
that  without  his  direction  nothing  ought  to  be  done,  that  all 
they  had  done  was  null  and  void,  that  the  election  must  be- 
gin anew,  and  "that  it  belonged  to  the  civil  magistrate  to 
prevent  the  disturbances  that  might  arise  on  such  occasions, 
lest  from  the  church  they  should  pass  to  the  State."  And 
as  these  elections  were  carried  not  only  by  violence,  but  by 
bribery,  in  which  the  property  of  the  church  played  an  im- 
portant part,  Odoacer,  by  his  lieutenant  at  this  same  assem- 
bly, A.  D.  483,  "caused  a  law  to  be  read,  forbidding  the 
bishop  who  should  now  be  chosen,  as  well  as  his  successors, 


532  THE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE  PAPACY. 

to  alienate  any  inheritance,  possessions,  or  sacred  utensils 
that  now  belonged,  or  should  for  the  future  belong,  to  the 
church  ;  declaring  all  such  bargains  void,  anathematizing 
both  the  seller  and  the  buyer,  and  obliging  the  latter  and 
his  heirs  to  restore  to  the  church  all  lands  and  tenements 
thus  purchased,  how  long  soever  they  might  have  possessed 
them. "  —  Bower. 12 

By  the  law  of  Oonstantine  which  bestowed  upon  the 
church  the  privilege  of  receiving  donations,  legacies,  etc., 
by  will,  lands  were  included  ;  and  through  nearly  two  hun- 
dred years  of  the  workings  of  this  law,  the  church  of  Rome 
had  become  enormously  enriched  in  landed  estates.  And 
more  especially  ' '  since  the  extinction  of  the  Western  empire 
had  emancipated  the  ecclesiastical  potentate  from  secular 
control,  the  first  and  most  abiding  object  of  his  schemes  and 
prayers  had  been  the  acquisition  of  territorial  wealth  in  the 
neighborhood  of  his  capital. "  —  Bryce. 13 

The  church  of  Rome  had  also  other  lands,  scattered  in 
different  parts  of  Italy,  and  even  in  Asia,  for  Celestine  I 
addressed  to  Theodosius  II  a  request  that  he  extend  his 
imperial  protection  over  certain  estates  in  Asia,  which  a 
woman  named  Proba  had  bequeathed  to  the  Church  of  Rome. 
As  the  imperial  power  faded  away  in  the  West,  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  in  his  growing  power,  came  more  and  more  to 
assert  his  own  power  of  protection  over  his  lands  in  Italy. 
And  when  the  imperial  power  was  entirely  gone,  it  was 
naturally  held  that  this  power  fell  absolutely  to  him.  When, 
therefore,  Odoacer,  both  a  barbarian  invader  and  a  heretic, 
issued  a  decree  forbidding  the  alienation  of  church  lands  and 
possessions,  this  was  represented  as  a  presumptuous  invasion 
of  the  rights  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  not  only  to  do  what  he 
would  with  his  own,  but  above  all  as  protector  of  the 
property  and  estates  of  the  church. 

For  this  offense  of  Odoacer,  there  was  no  forgiveness  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome.  Nothing  short  of  the  utter  uprooting 

12  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Felix  II,  par.  1. 

13  "  The  Holy  Roman  Empire,"  chap,  iv,  par.  7. 


DESTRUCTION  OF   TEE  HERULIAN  KINGDOM.        533 

of  the  Herulian  power  could  atone  for  it.  The  Catholic 
ecclesiastics  of  Italy  began  to  plot  for  his  overthrow,  and  it 
was  so6n  accomplished.  There  were  at  that  time  in  the 
dominions  of  the  Eastern  empire,  unsettled  and  wandering 
about  with  no  certain  dwelling-place,  the  people  of  the 
Ostrogoths  under  King  Theodoric.  Although  in  the  service 
of  the  empire,  they  were  dissatisfied  with  their  lot ;  and  they 
were  so  savage  and  so  powerful  that  the  emperor  was  in 
constant  dread  of  them.  Why  might  not  this  force  be  em- 
ployed to  destroy  the  dominion  of  the  Heruli,  and  deliver 
Rome  from  the  interferences  and  oppression  of  Odoacer? 
The  suggestion  was  made  to  Theodoric  by  the  court,  but  as 
lie  was  in  the  service  of  the  empire,  it  was  necessary  that  he 
should  have  permission  to  undertake  the  expedition.  He 
accordingly  addressed  the  emperor  as  follows  :  — 

"Although  your  servant  is  maintained  in  affluence  by  your  liberal- 
ity, graciously  listen  to  the  wishes  of  my  heart.  Italy,  the  inheritance 
of  your  predecessors,  and  Rome  itself,  the  head  and  mistress  of  the 
world,  now  fluctuates  under  the  violence  and  oppression  of  Odoacer  the 
mercenary.  Direct  me  with  my  national  troops,  to  march  against  the 
tyrant.  If  I  fall,  you  will  be  relieved  from  an  expensive  and  troublesome 
friend  :  if,  with  the  divine  permission,  I  succeed,  I  shall  govern  in  your 
name,  and  to  your  glory,  the  Roman  Senate,  and  the  part  of  the  republic 
delivered  from  slavery  by  my  victorious  army."  u 

The  proposition  which  had  been  suggested  was  gladly 
accepted  by  the  emperor  Zeno,  arid  in  the  winter  of  489,  the 
whole  nation  took  up  its  march  of  seven  hundred  miles  to  Italy. 
"The  march  of  Theodoric  must  be  considered  as  the  emigra- 
tion of  an  entire  people  :  the  wives  and  children  of  the 
Goths,  their  aged  parents,  and  most  precious  effects,  were 
carefully  transported ;  .  .  .  and  at  length,  surmounting 
every  obstacle  by  skillful  conduct  and  persevering  courage, 
he  descended  from  the  Julian  Alps,  and  displayed  his  invin- 
cible banners  on  the  confines  of  Italy." —  Gibbon.™ 

Theodoric  defeated  Odoacer  in  three  engagements,  A.  D. 
489-490,  and  ' '  from  the  Alps  to  the  extremity  of  Calabria, 

"Gibbon,  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxix,  par.  5.  w/d.,  par.  6. 


534  THE  SUPREMACY  OF    THE  PAPACY. 

Theodoric  reigned  by  right  of  conquest."  Odoacer  shut 
himself  up  in  Ravenna,  where  he  sustained  himself  against  a 
close  siege  for  three  years.  By  the  offices  of  the  bishop  of 
Ravenna,  and  the  clamors  of  the  hungry  people,  Odoacer 
was  brought  to  sign  a  treaty  of  peace.  He  was  soon  after- 
ward slain  at  a  solemn  banquet,  and  "at  the  same  moment, 
and  without  resistance,"  his  people  "were  universally  massa- 
cred," March  5,  A.  D.  493. 

Thus  was_  destroyed  the  kingdom  of  Odoacer  and  the 
Heruli.  And  that  it  was  in  no  small  degree  the  work  of  the 
Catholic  Church  is  certain  ;  for,  "Throughout  the  conquest 
and  establishment  of  the  Gothic  kingdom,  the  increasing 
power  and  importance  of  the  Catholic  ecclesiastics,  forces 
itself  upon  the  attention.  They  are  embassadors,  mediators 
in  treaties  ;  [they]  decide  the  wavering  loyalty  or  instigate  the 
revolt  of  cities. "  —  Milman. 16  The  bishop  of  Pa  via  himself 
bore  to  Theodoric  at  Milan  the  surrender  and  offer  of  al- 
legiance of  that  great  city. 

Another  thing  which  makes  this  view  most  certainly  true, 
is  the  fact  that  no  sooner  was  order  restored  in  Italy  and  in 
Rome,  and  the  church  once  more  felt  itself  secure,  than  a 
council  of  eighty  bishops,  thirty-seven  presbyters,  and  four 
deacons,  was  called  in  Rome  by  the  pope,  A.  D.  499,  the 
very  first  act  of  which  was  to  repeal  the  law  enacted  by 
Odoacer  on  the  subject  of  the  church  possessions.  Nor  was 
the  law  repealed  in  order  to  get  rid  of  it ;  for  it  was  immedi- 
ately re-enacted  by  the  same  council.  This  was  plainly  to 
declare  that  the  estates  of  the  church  were  no  longer  subject 
in  any  way  to  the  authority  of  the  civil  power,  but  were  to  be 
held  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  church  alone.  In  fact,  it 
was  tantamount  to  a  declaration  of  the  independence  of  the 
papacy  and  her  possessions. 

This  transaction  also  conclusively  proves  that  the  resent- 
ment of  the  bishopric  of  Rome,  which  had  been  aroused  by 
the  law  of  Odoacer,  was  never  allayed  until  Odoacer  and 

16  "  History  of  Latin  Christianty,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  3. 


THE OD OHIO'S  RULE  OF  ITALY.  535 

the  law,  so  far  as  it  represented  the  authority  of  the  civil 
power,  were  both  out  of  the  way.  And  this  is  the  secret  of 
the  destruction  of  the  Herulian  kingdom  of  Italy. 

It  is  no  argument  against  this  to  say  that  the  Ostrogoths 
were  Arians  too.  Because  (1)  as  we  shall  presently  see, 
Theodoric,  though  an  Arian,  did  not  interfere  with  church 
affairs  ;  and  (2)  the  Church  of  Rome,  in  destroying  one  oppo- 
nent never  hesitates  at  the  prospect  that  it  is  to  be  done  by 
another ;  nor  that  another  will  arise  in  the  place  of  the  one 
destroyed.  Upon  the  principle  that  it  is  better  to  have  one 
enemy  than  two,  she  will  use  one  to  destroy  another,  and 
will  never  miss  an  opportunity  to  destroy  one  for  fear  that 
another  will  arise  in  its  place. 

Theodoric  ruled  Italy  thirty-three  years,  A.  D.  493-526, 
during  which  time  Italy  enjoyed  such  peace  and  quietness 
and  absolute  security  as  had  never  been  known  there  before, 
and  has  never  been  known  there  since  until  1870.  The 
people  of  his  own  nation  numbered  two  hundred  thousand 
men,  which  with  the  proportionate  number  of  women  and 
children,  formed  a  population  of  nearly  one  million.  His 
troops,  formerly  so  wild  and  given  to  plunder,  were  restored 
to  such  discipline  that  in  a  battle  in  Dacia,  in  which  they 
were  completely  victorious,  ' '  the  rich  spoils  of  the  enemy 
lay  untouched  at  their  feet,"  because  their  leader  had  given 
no  signal  of  pillage.  When  such  discipline  prevailed  in  the 
excitement  of  a  victory  and  in  an  enemy's  country,  it  is  easy 
to  understand  the  peaceful  order  that  prevailed  in  their  own 
new-gotten  land  which  the  Herulians  had  held  before  them. 

During  the  ages  of  violence  and  revolution  which  had 
passed,  large  tracts  of  land  in  Italy  had  become  utterly 
desolate  and  uncultivated  ;  almost  the  whole  of  the  rest  was 
under  imperfect  culture ;  but  now  ' '  agriculture  revived 
under  the  shadow  of  peace,  and  the  number  of  husbandmen 
multiplied  by  the  redemption  of  captives  ; "  and  Italy,  which 
had  so  long  been  fed  from  other  countries,  now  actually 
began  to  export  grain.  Civil  order  was  so  thoroughly  main- 

41 


536      THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

tained  that  "the  city  gates  were  never  shut  either  by  day 
or  by  night,  and  the  common  saying  that  a  purse  of  gold 
might  be  safely  left  in  the  fields,  was  expressive  of  the  con- 
scious security  of  the  inhabitants. "-—  Gibbon. 17  Merchants 
and  other  lovers  of  the  blessings  of  peace  thronged  from 
all  parts. 

But  not  alone  did  civil  peace  reign.  Above  all,  there 
was  perfect  freedom  in  the  exercise  of  religion.  In  fact, 
the  measure  of  civil  liberty  and  peace  always  depends  upon 
that  of  religious  liberty.  Theodoric  and  his  people  were 
Arians,  yet  at  the  close  of  a  fifty  years'  rule  of  Italy,  the 
Ostrogoths  could  safely  challenge  their  enemies  to  present  a 
single  authentic  case  in  which  they  had  ever  persecuted  the 
Catholics.  Even  the  mother  of  Theodoric  and  some  of  his 
favorite  Goths  had  embraced  the  Catholic  faith  with  perfect 
freedom  from  any  molestation  whatever.  The  separation 
between  Church  and  State,  between  civil  and  religious 
powers,  was  clear  and  distinct.  Church  property  was  pro- 
tected in  common  with  other  property,  while  at  the  same 
time  it  was  taxed  in  common  with  all  other  property.  The 
clergy  were  protected  in  common  with  all  other  people,  and 
they  were  likewise,  in  common  with  all  other  people,  cited 
before  the  civil  courts  to  answer  for  all  civil  offenses.  In 
all  ecclesiastical  matters  they  were  left  entirely  to  them- 
selves. Even  the  papal  elections  Theodoric  left  entirely  to 
themselves,  and  though  often  solicited  by  both  parties  to 
interfere,  he  refused  to  have  anything  at  all  to  do  with 
them,  except  to  keep  the  peace,  which  in  fact  was  of  itself 
no  small  task.  He  declined  even  to  confirm  the  papal 
elections,  an  office  which  had  been  exercised  by  Odoacer. 

jSTor  was  this  merely  a  matter  of  toleration  ;  it  was  in 
genuine  recognition  of  the  rights  of  conscience.  In  a  letter 
to  the  emperor  Justin,  A.  D.  524,  Theodoric  announced  the  gen- 
uine principle  of  the  rights  of  conscience,  and  the  relation- 

17 "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxix,  par.  14;  and  Milmam's  "History  of 
Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  5, 


PAPAL  PROCEEDINGS  IN  ROME.  537 

ship  that  should  exist  between  religion  and  the  State,  in  the 
following  words,  worthy  to  be  graven  in  letters  of  gold  :  — 

"To  pretend  to  a  dominion  over  the  conscience,  is  to  usurp  the  pre- 
rogative of  God.  By  the  nature  of  things,  the  power  of  sovereigns  is 
confined  to  political  government.  They  have  no  right  of  punishment 
but  over  those  who  disturb  the  public  peace.  The  most  dangerous 
heresy  is  that  of  a  sovereign  who  separates  himself  from  part  of  his  sub- 
jects, because  they  believe  not  according  to  his  belief." 18 

Similar  pleas  had  before  been  made  by  the  parties  op- 
pressed, but  never  before  had  the  principle  been  announced 
by  the  party  in  power.  The  enunciation  and  defense  of  a 
principle  by  the  party  who  holds  the  power  to  violate  it, 
is  the  surest  pledge  that  the  principle  is  held  in  genuine 
sincerity. 

The  description  of  the  state  of  peace  and  quietness  in 
Italy  above  given,  applies  to  Italy,  ~but  not  to  Rome  /  to  the 
dominions  of  Theodoric  and  the  Ostrogoths,  but  not  to  the 
city  of  the  pope  and  the  Catholics.  In  A.  D.  499,  there  was 
a  papal  election.  As  there  were  as  usual  rival  candidates  — 
Symmachus  and  Laurentius  —  there  was  a  civil  war.  "  The 
two  factions  encountered  with  the  fiercest  hostility ;  the 
clergy,  the  Senate,  and  the  populace  were  divided  ;  "  the 
streets  of  the  city  ' '  ran  with  blood,  as  in  the  days  of  repub- 
lican strife. " —  Milman. 19 

The  contestants  were  so  evenly  matched,  and  the  violent 
strife  continued  so  long,  that  the  leading  men  of  both 
parties  persuaded  the  candidates  to  go  to  Theodoric  at 
Ravenna,  and  submit  to  his  judgment  their  claims.  Theod- 
oric's  love  of  justice  and  of  the  rights  of  the  people,  read- 
ily and  simply  enough  decided  that  the  candidate  who  had 
the  most  votes  should  be  counted  elected  ;  and  if  the  votes 
were  evenly  divided,  then  the  candidate  who  had  been  first 
ordained.  Symmachus  secured  the  office.  A  council  was 

18  Milman's  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  8  from 
the  end.  197d.,  par.  U. 


538  THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

held  by  Symmachus,  which  met  the  first  of  March,  499,  and 
passed  a  decree  "almost  in  the  terms  of  the  old  Roman 
law,  severely  condemning  all  ecclesiastical  ambition,  all 
canvassing  either  to  obtain  subscriptions,  or  administration 
of  oaths,  or  promises,  for  the  papacy  "  during  the  lifetime 
of  a  pope.  But  such  election  methods  as  these  were  now  so 
prevalent  that  this  law  was  of  as  little  value  in  controlling 
the  methods  of  the  aspiring  candidates  for  the  bishopric,  as 
in  the  days  of  the  republic  the  same  kind  of  laws  were  for 
the  candidates  to  the  consulship. 

Laurentius,  though  defeated  at  this  time,  did  not  discon- 
tinue his  efforts  to  obtain  the  office.  For  four  years  he 
watched  for  opportunities,  and  carried  on  an  intrigue  to  dis- 
place Symmachus,  and  in  503  brought  a  series  of  heavy 
charges  against  him.  ' '  The  accusation  was  brought  before 
the  judgment-seat  of  Theodoric,  supported  by  certain  Roman 
females  of  rank,  who  had  been  suborned,  it  was  said,  by  the 
enemies  of  Symmachus.  Symmachus  was  summoned  to 
Ravenna  and  confined  at  Rimini,"  but  escaped  and  returned 
to  Rome.  Meantime,  Laurentius  had  entered  the  city,  and 
when  Symmachus  returned,  "the  sanguinary  tumults  be- 
tween the  two  parties  broke  out  with  greater  fury  ;  "  priests 
were  slain,  monastaries  set  on  fire,  and  nuns  treated  with 
the  utmost  indignity. 

The  Senate  petitioned  Theodoric  to  send  a  visitor  to 
judge  the  cause  of  Symmachus  in  the  crimes  laid  against 
him.  The  king  finding  that  that  matter  was  only  a  church 
quarrel,  appointed  one  of  their  own  number,  the  bishop  of 
Altimo,  who  so  clearly  favored  Laurentius  that  his  partisan- 
ship only  made  the  contention  worse.  Again  Theodoric  was 
petitioned  to  interfere,  but  he  declined  to  assume  any  juris- 
diction, and  told  them  to  settle  it  among  themselves ;  but  as 
there  was  so  much  disturbance  of  the  peace,  and  it  was  so 
long  continued,  Theodoric  commanded  them  to  reach  some 
sort  of  settlement  that  would  stop  their  fighting,  and  restore 
public  order.  A  council  was  therefore  called.  As  Symma- 


THE  POPE  PUT  ABOVE   TEE  STATE.  539 

chus  was  on  his  way  to  the  council,  ' '  he  was  attacked  by 
the  adverse  party  ;  showers  of  stones  fell  around  him ; 
many  presbyters  and  others  of  his  followers  were  severely 
wounded ;  the  pontiff  himself  only  escaped  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  Gothic  guard  "  (3£ilman?°),  and  took  refuge  in 
the  church  of  St.  Peter.  The  danger  to  which  he  was 
then  exposed  he  made  an  excuse  for  not  appearing  at  the 
council. 

The  most  of  the  council  were  favorable  to  Symmachus 
and  to  the  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  at  this  time, 
and  therefore  were  glad  of  any  excuse  that  would  relieve 
them  from  judging  him.  However,  they  went  through  the 
form  of  summoning  him  three  times  ;  all  of  which  he  de- 
clined. Then  the  council  sent  deputies  to  state  to  Theodoric 
the  condition  of  affairs,  ' '  saying  to  him  that  the  authority  of 
the  king  might  compel  Symmachus  to  appear,  but  that  the 
council  had  not  such  authority."  Theodoric  replied  that 
"with  respect  to  the  cause  of  Symmachus,  he  had  assembled 
them  to  judge  him,  but  yet  left  them  at  full  liberty  to  judge 
him  or  not,  providing  they  could  by  any  other  means  put  a 
stop  to  the  present  calamities,  and  restore  the  wished-for 
tranquillity  to  the  city  of  Rome. " 

The  majority  of  the  council  declared  Symmachns  "ab- 
solved in  the  sight  of  men,  whether  guilty  or  innocent  in  the 
sight  of  God,"  for  the  reason  that  "  no  assembly  of  bishops 
has  power  to  judge  the  pope  ;  he  is  accountable  for  his 
actions  to  God  alone."  —  Bower ^  They  then  commanded 
all,  under  penalty  of  excommunication,  to  accept  this  judg- 
ment, and  submit  to  the  authority  of  Symmachus,  and 
acknowledge  him  "for  lawful  bishop  of  the  holy  city  of 
Rome."  Symmachus  was  not  slow  to  assert  all  the  merit 
that  the  council  had  thus  recognized  in  the  bishop  of  Rome. 
He  wrote  to  the  emperor  of  the  East  that  ' '  a  bishop  is  as 
much  above  an  emperor  as  heavenly  things,  which  the 
bishop  administers  and  dispenses,  are  above  all  the  trash  of 
20  Id.,  par.  14.  21 "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Symmachus,  par.  9,  10, 


540  THE  SUPREMACY  OF    THE   PAPACY. 

the  earth,  which  alone  the  greatest  among  the  emperors  have 
the  power  to  dispose  of."  —Bower.™  He  declared  that  the 
higher  powers  referred  to  in  Romans  xiii,  1,  mean  the 
spiritual  powers,  and  that  to  these  it  is  that  every  soul  must 
be  subject. 

At  another  council  held  in  Rome  in  504,  at  the  direction 
of  Symmachus,  a  decree  was  enacted  "anathematizing  and 
excluding  from  the  communion  of  the  faithful,  all  who  had 
seized  or  in  the  future  should  seize,  hold,  or  appropriate  to 
themselves,  the  goods  or  estates  of  the  church  ;  and  this  de- 
cree was  declared  to  extend  even  to  those  who  held  such 
estates  by  grants  from  the  crown." — Bmuer™  This  was 
explicitly  to  put  the  authority  of  the  church  of  Rome  above 
that  of  any  State. 

Justin  was  emperor  of  the  East  A.  D.  518-527.  He  was 
violently  orthodox,  and  was  supported  by  his  nephew,  the 
more  violently  orthodox  Justinian.  It  was  the  ambition  of 
both,  together  and  in  succession,  to  make  the  Catholic  re- 
ligion alone  prevalent  everywhere.  They  therefore  entered 
with  genuine  Catholic  zeal  upon  the  pious  work  of  clearing 
their  dominions  of  heretics.  The  first  edict,  issued  in  523, 
commanded  all  Manichseans  to  leave  the  empire  under  pen- 
alty of  death ;  and  all  other  heretics  were  to  be  ranked 
with  pagans  and  Jews,  and  excluded  from  all  public  offices. 
This  edict  was  no  sooner  learned  of  in  the  West,  than  mut- 
terings  were  heard  in  Rome,  of  hopes  of  liberty  from  the 
"  Gothic  yoke."  The  next  step  was  violence. 

Under  the  just  administration  of  Theodoric,  and  the 
safety  assured  by  the  Gothic  power,  many  Jews  had  estab- 
lished themselves  in  Rome,  Genoa,  Milan,  and  other  cities, 
for  the  purposes  of  trade.  They  were  permitted  by  express 
laws  to  dwell  there.  As  soon  as  the  imperial  edict  was 
known,  which  commanded  all  remaining  heretics  to  be 
ranked  as  pagans  and  Jews,  as  the  Catholics  did  not  dare 
to  attack  the  Gothic  heretics,  they,  at  Rome  and  Ravenna 

22  Id.,  par.  16.  *3Id.,  par.  18. 


CONSPIRACIES  AGAINST   THE  OSTROGOTHS.        541 

especially,  riotously  attacked  the  Jews,  abused  them,  robbed 
them,  and  burnt  their  synagogues.  A  legal  investigation 
was  attempted,  but  the  leader*  in  the  riots  could  not  be  dis- 
covered. Then  Theodoric  levied  a  tax  upon  the  whole  com- 
munity of  the  guilty  cities,  with  which  to  settle  the  damages. 
Some  of  the  Catholics  refused  to  pay  the  tax.  They  were 
punished.  This  at  once  brought  a  cry  from  the  Catholics 
everywhere,  that  they  were  persecuted.  Those  who  had 
been  punished  were  glorified  as  confessors  of  the  faith,  and 
"three  hundred  pulpits  deplored  the  persecution  of  the 
church."-—  Gibbon.zi 

The  edict  of  523  was  followed  in  524  by  another,  this 
time  commanding  the  Arians  of  the  East  to  deliver  up  to  the 
Catholic  bishops  all  their  churches,  which  the  Catholic 
bishops  were  commanded  to  consecrate  anew. 

Theodoric  addressed  an  earnest  letter  to  Justin,  in  which 
he  pleaded  for  toleration  for  the  Arians  from  the  Eastern 
empire.  This  was  the  letter  in  which  was  stated  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  rights  of  conscience,  which  we  have  already 
quoted  on  page  537.  To  this  noble  plea,  however,  "Justin 
coolly  answered  :  — 

"I  pretend  to  no  authority  over  men's  consciences,  but  it  is  my  pre- 
rogative to  intrust  the  public  offices  to  those  in  whom  I  have  confidence  ; 
and  public  order  demanding  uniformity  of  worship,  I  have  full  right  to 
command  the  churches  to  be  open  to  those  alone  who  shall  conform  to 
the  religion  of  the  State."25 

Accordingly,  while  pretending  to  no  authority  over 
men's  consciences,  the  Arians  of  his  dominions  were  by 
Justin  "  stripped  of  all  offices  of  honor  or  emolument,  were 
not  only  expelled  from  the  Cathoffc  churches,  but  their  own 
were  closed  against  them  ;  and  they  were  exposed  to  all 
insults,  vexations,  and  persecutions  of  their  adversaries, 
who  were  not  likely  to  enjoy  their  triumph  with  moderation, 

**"  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xxxlx,  par.  17  ;  Milman's  "History  of  Latin 
Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  23. 

25 Milman's  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  30. 


542  THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAP  ACT. 

or  to  repress  their  conscientiously  intolerant  zeal."  — 
JUilman.™  Many  of  them  conformed  to  the  state  religion  ; 
but  those  of  firm  faith  sent  to  Theodoric  earnest  appeals  for 
protection. 

Theodoric  did  all  that  he  could,  but  without  avail.  He 
was  urged  to  retaliate  by  persecuting  the  Catholics  in  Italy, 
but  he  steadfastly  refused.  He  determined  to  send  an  em- 
bassy to  Justin,  and  most  singularly  sent  the  pope  as  his 
embassador.  "The  pope,  attended  by  five  other  bishops 
and  four  senators,  set  forth  on  a  mission  of  which  it  was  the 
ostensible  object  to  obtain  indulgence  for  heretics  —  heretics 
under  the  ban  of  his  church  —  heretics  looked  upon  with 
the  most  profound  detestation." — MilmanJ1  This  arrange- 
ment gave  the  bishop  of  Rome  the  most  perfect  opportunity 
he  could  have  asked,  to  form  a  compact  with  the  imperial 
authority  of  the  East,  for  the  further  destruction  of  the 
Ostrogothic  kingdom. 

The  pope,  John  I,  ' '  was  received  in  Constantinople  with 
the  most  flattering  honors,  as  though  he  had  been  St. 
Peter  himself.  The  whole  city,  with  the  emperor  at  its 
head,  came  forth  to  meet  him  with  tapers  and  torches,  as  far 
as  ten  miles  beyond  the  gates.  The  emperor  knelt  at  his 
feet,  and  implored  his  benediction.  On  Easter  day,  March 
30,  525,  he  performed  the  service  in  the  great  church, 
Epiphanius  the  bishop  ceding  the  first  place  to  the  holy 
stranger." — Milman.™  Such  an  embassy  could  have  no 
other  result  than  more  than  ever  to  endanger  the  kingdom 
of  Theodoric.  Before  John's  return,  the  conspiracy  became 
more  manifest ;  some  senators  and  leading  men  were  ar- 
rested. One  of  them,  Boethius,  though  denying  his  guilt, 
boldly  confessed,  "Had  there  been  any  hopes  of  liberty,  I 
should  have  freely  indulged  them ;  had  I  known  of  a  con- 
spiracy against  the  king,  I  should  have  answered  in  the 
words  of  a  noble  Roman  to  the  frantic  Caligula,  You  would 
not  have  known  it  from  me."29  Such  a  confession  as  that 

™Id.  ™Id.  KId.,  par.  82.  89/d.,  par.  28. 


544  THE  SUPREMACY   OF   THE  PAPACY. 

of  his  country  was  often  sacrificed  to  that  of  defender  of  the 
faith." — Gibbon.*1  "The  emperor  Justinian  unites  in  him- 
self the  most  opposite  vices, —  insatiable  rapacity  and  lavish 
prodigality,  intense  pride  and  contemptible  weakness,  un- 
measured ambition  and  dastardly  cowardice.  ...  In  the 
Christian  emperor,  seem  to  meet  the  crimes  of  those  who 
won  or  secured  their  empire  Jby  assassination  of  all  whom 
they  feared,  the  passion  for  public  diversions  without  the 
accomplishments  of  Nero  or  the  brute  strength  of  Commo- 
dus,  the  dotage  of  Claudius."-  —  Milman.™ 

Pope  Felix  was  succeeded  by  Boniface  II,  A.  D.  530-532, 
who  was  chosen  amidst  the  now  customary  scenes  of  dis- 
turbance and  strife,  which  in  this  case  were  brought  to  an 
end,  and  the  election  of  Boniface  secured,  by  the  death  of 
his  rival,  who  after  his  death  was  excommunicated  by 
Boniface.  On  account  of  the  shameful  briberies  and  other 
methods  of  competition  employed  in  the  election  of  the 
popes,  the  Roman  Senate  now  enacted  a  law  "declaring 
null  and  execrable  all  promises,  bargains,  and  contracts,  by 
whomsoever  or  for  whomsoever  made,  with  a  view  to  engage 
suffrages  in  the  election  of  the  pope  ;  and  excluding  forever 
from  having  any  share  in  the  election,  such  as  should  be  found 
to  have  been  directly  or  indirectly  concerned  either  for  them- 
selves or  others,  in  contracts  or  bargains  of  that  nature." 
—  Bower.™  Laws  of  the  same  import  had  already  been 
enacted  more  than  once,  but  they  amounted  to  nothing  ;  be- 
cause as  in  the  days  of  Caesar,  everybody  was  ready  to  bribe 
or  be  bribed.  Accordingly,  at  the  very  next  election,  in  532, 
"Votes  were  publicly  bought  and  sold  ;  and  notwithstanding 
the  decree  lately  issued  by  the  Senate,  money  was  offered  to 
the  senators  themselves,  nay,,  the  lands  of  the  church  were 
mortgaged  by  some,  and  the  sacred  utensils  pawned  by  others 
or  publicly  sold  for  ready  money. "  —  Itower.3*  As  the  result 

31  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xlvii,  par.  23, 

33  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap.'iv,  par.  2. 

83 "History  of  the  Popes,"  Boniface  II,  par.  3.          s* Id.,  John  II,  par.  1. 


THE   TRISAGION  CONTROVERSY.  545 

of  seventy-five  days  of  this  kind  of  work,  a  certain  John  Mer- 
curius  was  made  pope,  and  took  the  title  of  John  II,  De- 
cember 31,  532. 

In  the  year  532,  Justinian  issued  an  edict  declaring  his 
intention  "to  unite  all  men  in  one  faith."  Whether  they 
were  Jews,  Gentiles,  or  Christians,  all  who  did  not  within 
three  months  profess  and  embrace  the  Catholic  faith,  were 
by  the  edict  "  declared  infamous,  and  as  such  excluded  from 
all  employments  both  civil  and  military  ;  rendered  incapable 
of  leaving  anything  by  will  ;  and  all  their  estates  confiscated, 
whether  real  or  personal."  As  a  result  of  this  cruel  edict, 
"  Great  numbers  were  driven  from  their  habitations  with 
their  wives  and  children,  stripped  and  naked.  Others  be- 
took themselves  to  flight,  carrying  with  them  what  they 
could  conceal,  for  their  support  and  maintenance  ;  but  they 
were  plundered  of  what  little  they  had,  and  many  of  them 
inhumanly  massacred."  — Bower. ,35 

There  now  occurred  a  transaction  which  meant  much  in  the 
supremacy  of  the  papacy.  It  was  brought  about  in  this 
way:  Ever  since  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  had  "settled" 
the  question  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  there  had  been 
more,  and  more  violent,  contentions  over  it  than  ever  before  ; 
"for  everywhere  monks  were  at  the  head  of  the  religious 
revolution  which  threw  off  the  yoke  of  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon." In  Jerusalem  a  certain  Theodosius  was  at  the  head 
of  the  army  of  monks,  who  made  him  bishop,  and  in  acts  of 
violence,  pillage,  and  murder,  he  fairly  outdid  the  perfectly 
lawless  bandits  of  the  country.  "The  very  scenes  of  the 
Saviour's  mercies  ran  with  blood  shed  in  his  name  by  his 
ferocious  self-called  disciples."  —Milman.36 

In  Alexandria  "the  bishop  was  not  only  murdered  in 
the  baptistery,  but  his  body  was  treated  with  shameless 
indignities,  and  other  enormities  were  perpetrated  which 
might  have  appalled  a  cannibal."  And  the  monkish  horde 

35  Id.,  par.  2. 

36 "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  i,  par.  5. 


546  THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

then  elected  as  bishop  one  of  their  own  number,  Timothy 
the  Weasel,  a  disciple  of  Dioscorus.  — Milman.51 

Soon  there  was  added  to  all  this,  another  point  which 
increased  the  fearful  warfare.  In  the  Catholic  churches  it 
was  customary  to  sing  what  was  called  the  Trisagion,  or 
Thrice-Holy.  It  was,  originally,  the  "Holy,  holy,  holy  is 
the  Lord  of  Hosts  "  of  Isaiah  vi,  3  ;  but  at  the  time  of  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon,  it  had  been  changed,  and  was  used 
by  the  council  thus  :  "Holy  God,  Holy  Almighty,  Holy  Im- 
mortal, have  mercy  on  us."  At  Antioch,  in  477,  a  third 
monk,  Peter  the  Fuller,  "led  a  procession,  chiefly  of  mo- 
nastics, through  the  streets,"  loudly  singing  the  Thrice-Holy, 
with  the  addition,  "Who  wast  crucified  for  us."  It  was 
orthodox  to  sing  it  as  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  had  used 
it,  with  the  understanding  that  the  three  "Holies"  referred 
respectively  to  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity.  It  was 
heresy  to  sing  it  with  the  later  addition. 

In  A.  D.  511,  two  hordes  of  monks  on  the  two  sides  of 
the  question  met  in  Constantinople.  "The  two  black- 
cowled  armies  watched  each  other  for  several  months,  work- 
ing in  secret  on  their  respective  partisans.  At  length  they 
came  to  a  rupture.  .  .  .  The  Monophysite  monks  in  the 
Church  of  the  Archangel  within  the  palace,  broke  out  after 
the  '  Thrice-Holy '  with  the  burden  added  at  Antioch  by 
Peter  the  Fuller,  'who  wast  crucified  for  us.1  The  orthodox 
monks,  backed  by  the  rabble  of  Constantinople,  endeavored 
to  expel  them  from  the  church  ;  they  were  not  content  with 
hurling  curses  against  each  other,  sticks  and  stones  began 
their  work.  There  was  a  wild,  fierce  fray  ;  the  divine  pres- 
ence of  the  emperor  lost  its  awe  ;  he  could  not  maintain  the 
peace.  The  bishop  Macedonius  either  took  the  lead,  or  was 
compelled  to  lead  the  tumult.  Men,  women,  and  children 
poured  out  from  all  quarters  ;  the  monks  with  their  archi- 


37  Id.  Bower  calls  him  Timothy  the  Cat ;  but  whether  "  weasel "  or 
"  cat,"  the  distinction  is  not  material,  as  either  fitly  describes  his  disposition, 
though  both  would  not  exaggerate  it. 


JUSTINIAN  JOINS  IN  THE  CONTROVERSY.  54.7 

mandrites  at  the  head  of  the  raging  multitude,  echoed  back 
their  religious  war-cry." — Milman.38 

These  are  but  samples  of  the  repeated  —  it  might  almost 
be  said  the  continuous  —  occurrences  in  the  cities  of  the 
East.  "Throughout  Asiatic  Christendom  it  was  the  same 
wild  struggle.  Bishops  deposed  quietly  ;  or  where  resist- 
ance was  made,  the  two  factions  fighting  in  the  streets,  in 
the  churches :  cities,  even  the  holiest  places,  ran  with 
blood.  .  .  .  The  hymn  of  the  angels  in  heaven  was  the 
battle  cry  on  earth,  the  signal  of  human  bloodshed." — 
Milman.39 

In  A.  D.  512  one  of  these  Trisagion  riots  broke  out  in 
Constantinople,  because  the  emperor  proposed  to  use  the 
added  clause.  "Many  palaces  of  the  nobles  were  set  on 
fire,  the  officers  of  the  crown  insulted,  pillage,  conflagration, 
violence,  raged  through  the  city."  In  the  house  of  the 
favorite  minister  of  the  emperor  there  was  found  a  monk 
from  the  country.  He  was  accused  of  having  suggested  the 
use  of  the  addition.  His  head  was  cut  off,  and  raised  high 
on  a  pole,  and  the  whole  orthodox  populace  marched 
through  the  streets  singing  the  orthodox  Trisagion^  and 
shouting,  "  Be-hold  the  enemy  of  the  Trinity." 40 

In  A.  D.  519,  another  dispute  was  raised,  growing  out  of 
the  addition  to  the  Trisagion.  That  was,  "Did  one  of  the 
Trinity  suffer  in  the  flesh  ?  or  did  one  person  of  the  Trinity 
suffer  in  the  flesh  ? "  The  monks  of  Scythia  affirmed  that 
one  of  the  Trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh,  and  declared  that  to 
say  that  one  person  of  the  Trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh,  was 
absolute  heresy.  The  question  was  brought  before  Pope 
Hormisdas,  who  decided  that  "  one  person  of  the  Trinity 
suffered  in  the  flesh "  was  the  orthodox  view  ;  and  de- 
nounced the  monks  as  proud,  arrogant,  obstinate,  enemies 
to  the  church,  disturbers  of  the  public  peace,  slanderers, 
liars,  and  instruments  employed  by  the  enemy  of  truth 
to  banish  all  truth,  to  establish  error  in  its  room,  and 

38 Id.,  par.  31.  39  Id.,  par.  21,  22. 


548      THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

to  sow  among  the  wheat  the  poisonous  seeds  of  diabol- 
ical tares. 

Now,  in  533,  this  question  was  raised  again,  and  Justin- 
ian became  involved  in  the  dispute. 

This  time  one  set  of  monks  argued  that  "if  one  of  the 
Trinity  did  not  suffer  on  the  cross,  then  one  of  the  Trinity 
was  not  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  therefore  she  ought  no 
longer  to  be  called  the  Mother  of  God."  Others  argued  :  "  If 
one  of  the  Trinity  did  not  suffer  on  the  cross,  then  Christ  who 
suffered  was  not  one  of  the  Trinity."  Justinian  entered  the 
lists  against  both,  and  declared  that  Mary  was  "truly  the 
Mother  of  God;"  that  Christ  was  "in  the  strictest  sense 
one  of  the  Trinity  ; "  and  that  whosoever  denied  either  the 
one  or  the  other,  was  a  heretic.  This  frightened  the  monks, 
because  they  knew  Justinian's  opinions  on  the  subject  of 
heretics  were  exceedingly  forcible.  They  therefore  sent  off 
two  of  their  number  to  lay  the  question  before  the  pope. 
As  soon  as  Justinian  learned  this,  he  too  decided  to  apply  to 
the  pope.  He  therefore  drew  up  a  confession  of  faith  that 
"one  of  the  Trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh,"  and  sent  it  by  two 
bishops  to  the  bishop  of  Rome.  To  make  his  side  of  the 
question  appear  as  favorable  as  possible  to  the  pope,  he  sent 
a  rich  present  of  chalices  and  other  vessels  of  gold,  enriched 
with  precious  stones  ;  and  the  following  flattering  letter  :  — 

"Justinian,  pious,  fortunate,  renowned,  triumphant;  emperor,  con- 
sul, etc.,  to  John,  the  most  holy  Archbishop  of  our  city  of  Rome,  and 
patriarch :  — 

"Rendering  honor  to  the  apostolic  chair,  and  to  your  Holiness,  as 
has  been  always  and  is  our  wish,  and  honoring  your  Blessedness  as  a 
father,  we  have  hastened  to  bring  to  the  knowledge  of  your  Holiness  all 
matters  relating  to  the  state  of  the  churches.  It  having  been  at  all  times 
our  great  desire  to  preserve  the  unity  of  your  apostolic  chair,  and  the 
constitution  of  the  holy  churqhes  of  God  which  has  obtained  hitherto, 
and  still  obtains. 

"  Therefore  we  have  made  no  delay  in  subjecting  and  uniting  to  your 
Holiness  all  the  priests  of  the  whole  East. 

"  For  this  reason  we  have  thought  fit  to  bring  to  your  notice  the 
present  matters  of  disturbance ;  though  they  are  manifest  and  unques- 


THE   VANDAL  KINGDOM  UPROOTED.  549 

tionable,  and  always  firmly  held  and  declared  by  the  whole  priesthood 
according  to  the  doctrine  of  your  apostolic  chair.  For  we  cannot  suffer 
that  anything  which  relates  to  the  state  of  the  church,  however  manifest 
and  unquestionable,  should  be  moved,  without  the  knowledge  of  your 
Holiness,  who  are  THE  HEAD  OP  ALL  THE  HOLY  CHURCHES  ;  for  in  all 
things,  we  have  already  declared,  we  are  anxious  to  increase  the  honor 
and  authority  of  your  apostolic  chair." 41 

All  things  were  now  ready  for  the  deliverance  of  the 
Catholic  Church  from  Arian  dominion.  Since  the  death  of 
Theodoric,  divided  councils  had  crept  in  amongst  the  Ostro- 
goths, and  the  Catholic  Church  had  been  more  and  more 
cementing  to  i|s  interests  the  powers  of  the  Eastern  throne. 
"Constant  amicable  intercourse  was  still  taking  place  be- 
tween the  Catholic  clergy  of  the  East  and  the  West ;  between 
Constantinople  and  Kome  ;  between  Justinian  and  the  rapid 
succession  of  pontiffs  who  occupied  the  throne  during  the 
ten  years  between  the  death  of  Theodoric  and  the  invasion 
of  Italy."  —  Milman.*2 

The  crusade  began  with  the  invasion  of  the  Arian  king- 
dom of  the  Vandals  in  Africa,  of  whom  Gelimer  was  the 
king,  and  was  openly  and  avowedly  in  the  interests  of  the 
Catholic  religion  and  church.  For  in  a  council  of  his  minis- 
ters, nobles,  and  bishops,  Justinian  was  dissuaded  from 
undertaking  the  African  war.  He  hesitated,  and  was  about 
to  relinquish  his  design,  when  he  was  rallied  by  a  fanatical 
bishop,  who  exclaimed  :  "I  have  seen  a  vision  !  It  is  the 
will  of  heaven,  O  emperor,  that  you  should  not  abandon  your 
holy  enterprise  for  the  deliverance  of  the  African  church. 
The  God  of  battle  will  march  before  your  standard  and  dis 
perse  your  enemies,  who  are  the  enemies  of  his  Son."*3 

This  persuasion  was  sufficient  for  the  "pious"  emperor, 
and  in  June  533,  "  the  whole  fleet  of  six  hundred  ships  was 
ranged  in  martial  pomp  before  the  gardens  of  the  palace," 
laden  and  equipped  with  thirty-five  thousand  troops  and 

"Croly's  "Apocalypse,"  chap,  xl,  "History,"  under  verses  3-10. 
42  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  iv,  par.  6, 
43 Gibbon's  "Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xli,  par.  3, 
42 


550  THE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE  PAPACY. 

sailors,  and  five  thousand  horses,  all  under  the  command  of 
Belisarius.  He  landed  on  the  coast  of  Africa  in  September  ; 
Carthage  was  captured  on  the  18th  of  the  same  month  ;  Geli- 
mer  was  disastrously  defeated  in  November  ;  and  the  con- 
quest of  Africa,  and  the  destruction  of  the  Vandal  kingdom, 
was  completed  by  the  capture  of  Gelimer  in  the  spring  of 
534."  During  the  rest  of  the  year,  Belisarius  "  reduced  the 
islands  of  Corsica,  Sardinia,  Majorica,  Minorica,  and  what- 
ever else  belonged  to  the  Yandals,  either  on  the  continent 
or  in  the  islands." — Bower. ^ 

Belisarius  dispatched  to  Justinian  the  new£  of  his  victory. 
' l  He  received  the  messengers  of  victory  at  the  time  when  he 
was  preparing  to  publish  the  Pandects  of  the  Roman  law ; 
and  the  devout  or  jealous  emperor  celebrated  the  divine 
goodness  and  confessed,  in  silence,  the  merit  of  his  success- 
ful general.  Impatient  to  abolish  the  temporal  and  spiritual 
tyranny  of  the  Yandals,  he  proceeded,  without  delay,  to  the 
full  establishment  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Her  jurisdiction, 
wealth,  and  immunities,  perhaps  the  most  essential  part  of 
episcopal  religion,  were  restored  and  amplified  with  a  liberal 
hand  ;  the  Arian  worship  was  suppressed,  the  Donatist  meet- 
ings were  proscribed  ;  and  the  Synod  of  Carthage,  by  the 
voice  of  two  hundred  and  seventeen  bishops,  applauded  the 
just  measure  of  pious  retaliation." —  Gibbon.^ 

As  soon  as  this  pious  work  had  been  fully  accomplished 
in  Africa,  the  arms  of  Justinian  were  turned  against  Italy 
and  the  Arian  Ostrogoths.  In  534  Amalasontha  had  been 
supplanted  in  her  rule  over  the  Ostrogoths  by  her  cousin 
Theodotus.  And  "during  the  short  and  troubled  reign  of 
Theodotus  —  534  to  536  —  Justinian  received  petitions  from 
all  parts  of  Italy,  and  from  all  persons,  lay  as  well  as  cler- 
ical, with  the  air  and  tone  of  its  sovereign."  —  Milman." 

44  Id.,  par.  7-12. 

45  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Agapetus,  par.  5,  note  A. 
*6  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xli,  par.  11. 

17  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii  chap,  iv,  par.  7. 


THE   OSTROOOTHIC  KINGDOM  DESTROYED.        551 

Belisarius  subdued  Sicily  in  535,  and  invaded  Italy  and 
captured  Naples  in  536.  As  it  was  now  about  the  first  of 
December,  the  Gothic  warriors  decided  to  postpone,  until 
the  following  spring,  their  resistance  to  the  invaders.  A 
garrison  of  four  thousand  soldiers 'was  left  in  Rome,  a  feeble 
number  to  defend  such  a  city  at  such  a  time  in  any  case,  but 
these  troops  proved  to  be  even  more  feeble  in  faith  than 
they  were  in  numbers.  They  threw  over  all  care  of  the  city, 
and  "  furiously  exclaimed  that  the  apostolic  throne  should 
no  longer  be  profaned  by  the  triumph  or  toleration  of 
Arianism  ;  that  the  tombs  of  the  Caesars  should  no  longer  be 
trampled  by  the  savages  of  the  North  ;  and,  without  reflect- 
ing that  Italy  must  sink  into  a  province  of  Constantinople, 
they  fondly  hailed  the  restoration  of  a  Roman  emperor 
as  a  new  era  of  freedom  and  prosperity.  The  deputies  of 
the  pope  and  clergy,  of  the  Senate  and  people,  invited  the 
lieutenant  of  Justinian  to  accept  their  voluntary  allegiance, 
and  to  enter  into  the  city  whose  gates  would  be  thrown  open 
to  his  reception."  -  Gibbon.** 

Belisarius  at  once  marched  to  Rome,  which  he  entered  De- 
cember 10,  536.  But  this  was  not  the  conquest  of  Italy  or 
even  of  Rome.  ' '  From  their  rustic  habitations,  from  their 
different  garrisons,  the  Goths  assembled  at  Ravenna  for  the 
defense  of  their  country  :  and  such  were  their  numbers  that 
after  an  army  had  been  detached  for  the  relief  of  Dalmatia, 
one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  fighting  men  marched  under 
the  royal  standard"  in  the  spring,  A.  D.  537  ;  and  the  Gothic 
nation  returned  to  the  siege  of  Rome  and  the  defense  of 
Italy  against  the  invaders.  "The  whole  nation  of  the 
Ostrogoths  had  been  assembled  for  the  attack,  and  was  al- 
most entirely  consumed  in  the  siege  of  Rome,"  which  con- 
tinued above  a  year,  537-538.  "One  year  and  nine  days 
after  the  commencement  of  the  siege,  an  army  so  lately 
strong  and  triumphant,  burnt  their  tents,  and  tumultuously 
repassed  the  Milvian  bridge,"  and  Rome  was  delivered, 

48  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xli,  par.  22. 


552  THE  SUPREMACY   OF   THE  PAPACY. 

March  538.  The  remains  of  the  kingdom  were  soon  after- 
ward destroyed.  "They  had  lost  their  king  (an  inconsid- 
erable loss),  their  capital,  their  treasures,  the  provinces 
from  Sicily  to  the  Alps,  and  the  military  force  of  two  hun- 
dred thousand  barbarians,  magnificently  equipped  with 
horses  and  arms."-  -  Gibbon.**  And  thus  was  the  kingdom 
of  the  Ostrogoths  destroyed  before  the  vengeful  arrogance 
of  the  papacy. 

This  completely  opened  the  way  for  the  bishop  of 
Rome  to  assert  his  sole  authority  over  the  estates  of 
the  church.  The  district  immediately  surrounding  Rome 
was  called  the  Roman  duchy,  and  it  was  so  largely  occupied 
by  the  estates  of  the  church  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  claimed 
exclusive  authority  over  it.  ' '  The  emperor,  indeed,  con- 
tinued to  control  the  elections  and  to  enforce  the  payment 
of  tribute  for  the  territory  protected  by  the  imperial  arms  ;  but, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  pontiff  exercised  a  definite  authority 
within  the  Roman  duchy,  and  claimed  to  have  a  voice  in 
the  appointment  of  the  civil  officers  who  administered 
the  local  government." — Encyclopedia  Britannica.™  Un- 
der the  protectorate  of  the  armies  of  the  East  which  soon 
merged  in  the  exarch  of  Ravenna,  the  papacy  enlarged  its 
aspirations,  confirmed  its  powers,  and  strengthened  its  situa- 
tion both  spiritually  and  temporally.  Being  by  the  decrees 
of  the  councils,  and  the  homage  of  the  emperor,  made  the 
head  of  all  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  dominion  on  earth, 
and  being  now  in  possession  of  territory,  and  exerting  a 
measure  of  civil  authority  therein,  the  opportunity  that  now 
fell  to  the  ambition  of  the  bishopric  of  Rome  was  to  assert, 
to  gain,  and  to  exercise,  supreme  authority  in  all  things  tem- 
poral as  well  as  spiritual.  And  the  sanction  of  this  aspira- 

49  Id.,  par.  23,  28,  and  chap,  xliii,  par.  4.  Afterward,  from  541  till  553, 
there  was  carried  on  what  had  been  called  the  "  Gothic  "  War  ;  but  those  who 
made  the  war  were  not  Goths.  They  were  "  a  new  people,"  made  up  of  Roman 
captives,  slaves,  deserters,  and  whoever  else  might  choose  to  join  them,  with  but 
a  thousand  Goths  to  begin  with.  See  Gibbon,  Id.,  chap,  xliii,  par.  4  and  6. 

60  Article  "Popedom,"  par.  25. 


TEMPORAL  AUTHORITY  OF   THE  PAPACY.         553 

tion  was  made  to  accrue  from  Justinian's  letter,  in  which  he 
rendered  such  distinctive  honor  to  the  apostolic  see.  It  is 
true  that  Justinian  wrote  these  words  with  no  such  far-reach- 
ing meaning,  but  that  made  no  difference  ;  the  words  were 
written,  and  like  all  other  words  of  similar  import,  they 
could  be,  and  were,  made  to  bear  whatever  meaning  the 
bishop  of  Rome  should  choose  to  find  in  them. 

Therefore,  the  year  A.  D.  538,  which  marks  the  conquest 
of  Italy,  the  deliverance  of  Rome,  and  the  destruction  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Ostrogoths,  is  the  true  date  which  marks  the 
establishment  of  the  temporal  authority  of  the  papacy,  and 
the  exercise  of  that  authority  as  a  world-power.  All  that 
was  ever  done  later  in  this  connection  was  but  to  enlarge  by 
additional  usurpations  and  donations,  the  territories  which 
the  bishop  of  Rome  at  this  point  possessed,  and  over  which 
he  asserted  civil  jurisdiction.  This  view  is  fully  sustained 
by  the  following  excellent  statement  of  the  case  :  — 

"  The  conquest  of  Italy  by  the  Greeks  was,  to  a  great  extent  at  least, 
the  work  of  the  Catholic  clergy.  .  .  .  The  overthrow  of  the  Gothic  king- 
dom was  to  Italy  an  unmitigated  evil.  A  monarch  like  Witiges  or 
Totila  would  soon  have  repaired  the  mischiefs  caused  by  the  degenerate 
successors  of  Theodoric,  Athalaric,  and  Theodotus.  In  their  overtliroio 
began  the  fatal  policy  of  the  Roman  see,  .  .  .  which  never  would  permit  a 
powerful  native  kingdom  to  unite  Italy,  or  a  very  large  part  of  it,  under 
one  dominion.  Whatever  it  may  have  been  to  Christendom,  the  papacy 
has  been  the  eternal,  implacable  foe  of  Italian  independence  and  Italian 
unity  ;  and  so  (as  far  as  independence  and  unity  might  have  given  dig- 
nity, political  weight,  and  prosperity)  to  the  welfare  of  Italy.  .  .  . 
Rome,  jealous  of  all  temporal  sovereignty  but  her  own,  for  centuries 
yielded  up,  or  rather  made  Italy  a  battle  field  to  the  Transalpine  and  the 
stranger,  and  at  the  same  time  so  secularized  her  own  spiritual  suprem- 
acy as  to  confound  altogether  the  priest  and  the  politician,  to  degrade 
absolutely  and  almost  irrevocably  the  kingdom  of  Christ  into  a  kingdom 
of  this  world." — Milman.61 

Then  "began  that  fatal  policy  of  the  Roman  see,"  be- 
cause she  was  then  herself  a  world-power,  possessing  tem- 
poralities over  which  she  both  claimed  and  exercised  domin- 

61 "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  Hi,  chap,  iv,  last  two  par. 


554:  THE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE   PAPACY. 

ion,  and  by  virtue  of  which  she  could  contend  with  other 
dominions,  and  upon  the  same  level.  And  that  which  made 
the  papacy  so  much  the  more  domineering  in  this  fatal 
policy,  was  the  fact  of  Justinian's  having  so  fully  committed 
himself.  When  the  mightiest  emperor  who  had  ever  sat  on 
the  Eastern  throne  had  not  only  under  his  own  hand  ren- 
dered such  decided  homage  to  the  papacy,  but  had  rooted 
out  the  last  power  that  stood  in  her  way,  this  to  her  was 
strongly  justifiable  ground  for  her  assertion  of  dominion 
over  all  other  dominions,  and  her  disputing  dominion  with 
the  powers  of  the  earth. 

It  is  evident  that  as  the  papacy  had  hitherto  claimed, 
and  had  actually  acquired,  absolute  dominion  over  all  things 
spiritual,  henceforth  she  would  claim,  and,  if  crafty  policy 
and  unscrupulous  procedure  were  of  any  avail,  would  actu- 
ally acquire,  absolute  dominion  over  all  things  temporal  as 
well  as  spiritual.  Indeed,  as  we  have  seen,  this  was  already 
claimed,  and  the  history  of  Europe  for  more  than  a  thou- 
sand of  the  following  years,  abundantly  proves  that  the 
claim  was  finally  and  fully  established.  Henceforth  kings 
and  emperors  were  but  her  tools,  and  often  but  her  play- 
things ;  and  kingdoms  and  empires  her  conquests,  and  often 
only  her  traffic. 

The  history  of  this  phase  of  the  papacy  is  fully  as  inter- 
esting, though  the  details  are  not  so  important,  as  that 
which  shows  how  her  ecclesiastical  supremacy  was  estab- 
lished. Here,  however,  will  be  noticed  but  the  one  point, 
how  the  papacy  assumed  the  supremacy  over  kings  and  em- 
perors, and  acquired  the  prerogative  of  dispensing  kingdoms 
and  empires. 

The  contest  began  even  with  Justinian,  who  had  done  so 
much  to  exalt  the  dignity  and  clear  the  way  of  the  papacy. 
Justinian  soon  became  proud  of  his  theological  abilities,  and 
presumed  to  dictate  the  faith  of  the  papacy,  rather  than  to 
submit,  as  formerly,  to  her  guidance.  And  from  A.  D.  542  to 


GREGORY   THE   (JKEAT. 


THE  LOMBARDS  INVADE  ITALY.  555 

the  end  of  his  long  reign  in  565,  there  was  almost  constant 
war,  with  alternate  advantage,  between  Justinian  and  the 
popes.  But  as  emperors  live  and  die,  while  the  papacy 
only  lives,  the  real  victory  remained  with  her. 

In  A.  D.  568  the  Lombards  invaded  Italy,  and  for  nearly 
twenty  years  wrought  such  devastation  that  even  the  pope 
thought  the  world  was  coming  to  an.  end.  The  imperial 
power  of  the  East  was  so  weak  that  the  defense  of  Italy  fell 
exclusively  to  the  exarch  of  Ravenna  and  the  pope.  And 
as  "the  death  of  Narses  had  left  his  successor,  the  exarch 
of  Ravenna,  only  the  dignity  of  a  sovereignty  which  he  was 
too  weak  to  exercise  for  any  useful  purpose  of  government " 
(Milman5z\  the  pope  alone  became  the  chief  defender  of 
Italy.  In  580  Gregory  I  —  the  Great  —  became  pope,  and 
concluded  a  treaty  of  peace  with  the  Lombards,  and  ' '  the 
pope  and  the  king  of  the  Lombards  became  the  real  powers 
in  the  north  and  center  of  Italy. "--  Encyclopedia  Britan- 
nica.5s 

The  wife  of  the  king  of  the  Lombards  was  a  Catholic, 
and  by  the  influence  of  Gregory,  she  "solemnly  placed 
the  Lombard  nation  under  the  patronage  of  St.  John  the 
Baptist.  At  Monza  she  built  in  his  honor  the  first  Lombard 
church,  and  the  royal  palace  near  it." — Id.  From  this  the 
Lombards  soon  became  Catholic  ;  but  though  this  was  so, 
they  would  not  suffer  the  priesthood  to  have  any  part  in  the 
affairs  of  the  kingdom.  They  "never  admitted  the  bishops 
of  Italy  to  a  seat  in  their  legislative  councils."  —  Gibbon.5* 
And  although  under  the  Lombard  dominion  "the  Italians 
enjoyed  a  milder  and  more  equitable  government  than  any 
of  the  other  kingdoms  which  had  been  founded  on  the  ruins 
of  the  empire,"  this  exclusion  of  the  clergy  from  affairs  of 
the  State  was  as  much  against  them  now,  though  Catholic, 

5a  "History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iii,  chap,  vii,  par.  1. 

63  Article  "  Lombards,"  par  6. 

54  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap.  xlv.  par.  18. 


556       THE  SUPREMACY  OF  TEE  PAPACY. 

as  their  Arianism  had  been  against  them  before  ;  and  the 
popes  ever  anxiously  hoped  to  have  them  driven  entirely 
from  Italy. 

In  728  the  edict  of  the  Eastern  emperor  abolishing  the 
images,  was  published  in  Italy.  The  pope  defended  the 
images,  of  course,  and  "the  Italians  swore  to  live  and  die 
in  defense  of  the  pope  and  the  holy  images." — Gibbon.™ 
An  alliance  was  formed  between  the  Lombards  and  the 
papacy  for  the  defense  of  the  images.  The  alliance,  how- 
ever, did  not  last  long.  Both  powers  being  determined  to 
possess  as  much  of  Italy  as  possible,  there  was  constant 
irritation,  which  finally  culminated  in  open  hostilities,  and 
the  Lombards  invaded  the  papal  territory  in  A.  D.  739. 

Charles  Martel,  the  mayor  of  the  palace  of  the  Frankish 
kingdom,  had  gained  a  world-wide  glory  by  his  late  victory 
over  the  Mohammedans  at  Tours.  Of  all  the  barbarians, 
the  Franks  were  the  first  who  had  become  Catholic,  and  ever 
since,  they  had  been  dutiful  sons  of  the  church.  The  pope, 
Gregory  III,  now  determined  to  appeal  to  Charles  for  help 
against  this  assertion  of  Lombard  dominion.  He  sent  to 
Charles  the  keys  of  the  "  sepulcher  of  St.  Peter ;"  some 
filings  from  the  chains  with  which  "  Peter  had  been  bound  ; " 
and,  more  important  than  all,  as  the  legitimate  inheritor  of 
the  authority  of  the  ancient  Roman  republic,  he  presumed  to 
bestow  upon  Charles  Martel  the  title  of  Roman  consul. 
"  Throughout  these  transactions  the  pope  appears  actually, 
if  not  openly,  an  independent  power,  leaguing  with  the 
allies  or  the  enemies  of  the  empire,  as  might  suit  the 
exigencies  of  the  time."  And  now,  "  the  pope,  as  an  inde- 
pendent potentate,  is  forming  an  alliance  with  a  Transalpine 
sovereign  for  the  liberation  of  Italy."  —MilmanJ* 

The  Lombards,  too,  sent  to  Charles  with  counter  nego- 
tiations. This  the  pope  knew,  and  wrote  to  Charles  that  in 

55  Id.,  chap,  xlix,  par.  9. 

56  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap,  ix,  par.  14,  26. 


THE  POPE  APPEALS   TO  FRANCE.  557 

Italy  the  Lombards  were  treating  him  with  contempt,  and 
were  saying,  "Let  him  come,  this  Charles,  with  his  army 
of  Franks ;  if  he  can,  let  him  rescue  you  out  of  our 
hands  ; "  and  then  Gregory  laments  and  pleads  with  Charles 
thus :  — 

"O  unspeakable  grief,  that  such  sons  so  insulted  should  make  no 
effort  to  defend  their  holy  mother  the  church  !  Not  that  St.  Peter  is 
unable  to  protect  his  successors,  and  to  exact  vengeance  upon  their  op- 
pressors, but  the  apostle  is  putting  the  faith  of  his  followers  to  trial. 
Believe  not  the  Lombard  kings,  that  their  only  object  is  to  punish  their 
refractory  subjects,  the  dukes  of  Spoleto  and  Benevento,  whose  only 
crime  is  that  they  will  not  join  in  the  invasion  and  plunder  of  the 
Roman  see.  Send,  O  my  Christian  son,  some  faithful  officer,  who  may 
report  to  you  truly  the  condition  of  affairs  here  ;  who  may  behold  with 
his  own  eyes  the  persecutions  we  are  enduring,  the  humiliation  of  the 
church,  the  desolation  of  our  property,  the  sorrow  of  the  pilgrims  who 
frequent  our  shrine.  Close  not  your  ears  against  our  supplication,  lest 
St.  Peter  close  against  you  the  gates  of  heaven.  I  conjure  you  by  the 
living  and  the  true  God,  and  by  the  keys  of  St.  Peter,  not  to  prefer  the 
alliance  of  the  Lombards  to  the  love  of  the  great  apostle,  but  hasten, 
hasten  to  our  succor,  that  we  may  say  with  the  prophet,  '  The  Lord  has 
heard  us  in  the  day  of  tribulation,  the  God  of  Jacob  has  protected  us.''57 

The  embassadors  and  the  letters  of  the  pope  "were  re- 
ceived by  Charles  with  decent  reverence  ;  but  the  greatness 
of  his  occupations  and  the  shortness  of  his  life,  prevented 
his  interference  in  the  affairs  of  Italy,  except  by  friendly 
and  ineffectual  mediation."--  Gibbon.™  But  affairs  soon 
took  such  a  turn  in  France  that  the  long-cherished  desire  of 
the  papacy  was  rewarded  with  abundant  fruition.  Charles 
Martel  was  simply  duke  or  mayor  of  the  palace,  under  the 
sluggard  kings  of  France.  He  died  October  21,  741. 
Gregory  III  died  November  27,  of  the  same  year,  and  was 
succeeded  by  Zacharias.  No  immediate  help  coming  from 
France,  Zacharias  made  overtures  to  the  Lombards,  arid  a 

67  Milraan's  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  iv,  chap.  Ix,  par.  24, 

68  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xlix,  par.  12. 


558      THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

treaty  of  peace  for  twenty  years  was  concluded  between  the 
kingdom  of  Lombardy  and  ' '  the  dukedom  of  Rome. " 

Charles  Martel  left  two  sons,  Carloman  and  Pepin  ;  but 
Carloman  being  the  elder,  was  his  successor  in  office.  He 
had  been  in  place  but  a  little  while,  before  he  resigned  it  to 
his  brother,  and  became  a  monk,  A.  D.  747.  The  events  in 
Italy,  and  the  prestige  which  the  pope  had  gained  by  them, 
exerted  a  powerful  influence  in  France,  and  as  the  pope  had 
already  desired  a  league  with  Charles  Martel,  who  although 
not  possessing  the  title,  held  all  the  authority,  of  a  king, 
Pepin,  his  successor,  conceived  the  idea  that  perhaps  he 
could  secure  the  papal  sanction  to  his  assuming  the  title  of 
king  with  the  authority  which  he  already  possessed.  Pepin 
therefore  sent  two  ecclesiastics  to  consult  the  pope  as  to 
whether  he  might  not  be  king  of  France,  and  Zacharias  re- 
turned answer  "that  the  nation  might  lawfully  unite,  in  the 
same  person,  the  title  and  authority  of  king  ;  and  that  the 
unfortunate  Childeric,  a  victim  of  the  public  safety,  should 
be  degraded,  shaved,  and  confined  in  a  monastery  for  the 
remainder  of  his  days.  An  answer  so  agreeable  to  their 
wishes  was  accepted  by  the  Franks  as  the  opinion  of  a  casu- 
ist, the  sentence  of  a  judge,  or  the  oracle  of  a  prophet ;  .  .  . 
and  Pepin  was  exalted  on  a  buckler  by  the  suffrage  of  a  free 
people,  accustomed  to  obey  his  laws,  and  to  march  under  his 
standard  ; "  and  March  7,  752,  was  proclaimed  king  of  the 
Franks.  —  Gibbon.™ 

Zacharias  died  March  14  the  same  year,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Stephen  II,  who  died  the  fourth  day  afterward, 
and  before  his  consecration,  and  Stephen  III  became  pope, 
March  26.  Astolph  was  now  king  of  the  Lombards.  He 
had  openly  declared  himself  the  enemy  of  the  pope,  and  was 
determined  to  make  not  only  the  territories  of  the  exarchate, 
but  those  of  the  pope,  his  own.  "In  terms  of  contumely  and 
menace,  he  demanded  the  instant  submission  of  Rome,  and 

59Id.,  par.  13. 


THE  POPE  ANOINTS  PEPIN  KINO.  559 

the  payment  of  a  heavy  personal  tribute,  a  poll-tax  on  each 
citizen."  The  pope  sent  embassadors,  but  they  were  treated 
with  contempt,  and  Astolph  approached  Koine  to  enforce 
his  demand.  "The  pope  appealed  to  heaven,  by  tying  a 
copy  of  the  treaty,  violated  by  Astolph,  to  the  holy  cross." 
—  Milman.™ 

He  wrote  to  Pepin,  but  got  no  answer  ;  in  his  distress 
he  wrote  even  to  Constantinople,  but  much  less  from  there 
was  there  any  answer.  Then  he  determined  to  go  per- 
sonally to  Pepin,  and  ask  his  help.  There  was  present  at 
the  court  of  the  pope  an  embassador  from  the  court  of 
France,  under  whose  protection  Stephen  placed  himself,  and 
traveled  openly  through  the  dominions  of  Astolph.  No- 
vember 15,  752  he  entered  the  French  dominions.  He  was 
met  on  the  frontier  by  one  of  the  clergy  and  a  nobleman, 
with  orders  to  conduct  him  to  the  court  of  the  king.  A 
hundred  miles  from  the  palace  he  was  met  by  Prince 
Charles,  afterward  the  mighty  Charlemagne,  with  other  no- 
bles who  escorted  him  on  his  way.  Three  miles  from  the 
palace,  the  king  himself,  with  his  wife  and  family,  and  an 
array  of  nobles,  met  Stephen.  "  As  the  pope  approached, 
the  king  dismounted  from  his  horse,  and  prostrated  himself 
on  the  ground  before  him.  He  then  walked  by  the  side  of 
the  pope's  palfry.  The  pope  and  the  ecclesiastics  broke  out 
at  once  into  hymns  of  thanksgiving,  and  so  chanting  as  they 
went,  reached  the  royal  residence.  Stephen  lost  no  time  in 
adverting  to  the  object  of  his  visit.  He  implored  the  im- 
mediate interposition  of  Pepin  to  enforce  the  restoration  of 
St.  Peter.  .  .  .  Pepin  swore  at  once  to  fulfill  all  the  requests 
of  the  pope ;  but,  as  the  winter  rendered  all  military 
operations  impracticable,  invited  him  to  Paris,  where 
he  took  up  his  residence  in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Denys."- 
Milman.61 

60  "  History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  Iv,  chap,  xi,  par.  24. 

61  Id.,  par.  25. 


560  THE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE  PAPACY. 

Pepin  had  already  been  anointed  by  a  bishop  in  France, 
but  this  was  not  enough  ;  the  pope  must  anoint  him  too,  and 
then  upon  this  claim  that  the  king  of  the  Franks  held  his 
kingdom  by  the  grace  of  the  bishop  of  Rome.  In  the  mon- 
astery of  St.  Denys,  Stephen  III  placed  the  diadem  on  the 
head  of  Pepin,  anointed  him  with  the  holy  oil,  confirmed 
the  sovereignty  in  his  house  forever,  and  pronounced  an 
eternal  curse  upon  all  who  should  attempt  to  name  a  king  of 
France  from  any  other  than  the  race  of  Pepin.  The  pope 
was  attacked  with  a  dangerous  sickness  which  kept  him  at 
the  capital  of  France  until  the  middle  of  753. 

At  some  point  in  this  series  of  transactions,  we  know  not 
exactly  where,  the  pope  as  the  head  of  the  restored  republic 
of  Rome,  renewed  to  Pepin  the  Roman  title  and  dignity  of 
patrician,  which,  as  well  as  that  of  consul,  had  been  con- 
ferred upon  Charles  Martel.  The  insignia  of  this  new  office 
were  the  keys  of  the  shrine  of  St.  Peter,  "  as  a  pledge  and 
symbol  of  sovereignty;"  and  a  "holy"  banner  which  it 
was  their  ' '  right  and  duty  to  unfurl "  in  the  defense  of  the 
church  and  city  of  Rome. 

Meantime  Astolpli  had  persuaded  Carloman  to  leave  his 
monastery,  and  go  to  the  court  of  Pepin  to  counteract  the 
influence  of  the  pope,  and  if  possible  to  win  Pepin  to  the 
cause  of  the  Lombards.  But  the  unfortunate  Carloman  was 
at  once  imprisoned  "for  life,"  and  his  life  was  ended  in  a 
few  days.  In  September  and  October  753,  Pepin  and  the 
pope  marched  to  Italy  against  Astolph,  who  took  refuge  in 
Pavia.  They  advanced  to  the  walls  of  that  city ;  and 
Astolph  was  glad  to  purchase  an  ignominious  peace,  by 
pledging  himself,  on  oath,  to  restore  the  territory  of  Rome. 

Pepin  returned  to  his  capital ;  and  Stephen  retired  to 
Rome.  But  Pepin  was  no  sooner  well  out  of  reach,  than 
Astolph  was  under  arms  again,  and  on  his  way  to  Rome. 
He  marched  to  the  very  gates  of  the  city,  and  demanded  the 
surrender  of  the  pope.  "He  demanded  that  the  Romans 


PEPIN'S   GIFT   TO    THE  PAPACY.  561 

should  give  up  the  pope  into  his  hands,  and  on  these  terms 
only  would  he  spare  the  city.  Astolph  declared  he  would 
not  leave  the  pope  a  foot'  of  land.''-  —  MUnian.^ 

Stephen  hurried  away  messengers  with  a  letter  to  Pepin 
in  which  the  pope  reminded  him  that  St.  Peter  had  prom- 
ised him  eternal  life  in  return  for  a  vow  which  he  had  made 
to  make  a  donation  to  St.  Peter.  He  told  Pepin  that  he 
risked  eternal  damnation  in  not  hastening  to  fulfill  his  vow  ; 
and  that  as  Peter  had  Pepin's  handwriting  to  the  vow,  if  he 
did  not  fulfill  it,  the  apostle  would  present  it  against  him  in 
the  day  of  judgment.  Pepin  did  not  respond,  and  a  second 
letter  was  dispatched  in  which  the  pope  ""conjured  him,  by 
God  and  his  holy  mother,  by  the  angels  in  heaven,  by  the 
apostles  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  by  the  last  day,"  to 
hasten  to  the  rescue  of ,  his  holy  mother  the  church,  and 
promised  him  if  he  would  do  so,  "victory  over  all  the  bar- 
barian nations,  and  eternal  life."  But  yet  Pepin  did  not 
respond,  and  as  Astolph  was  pressing  closer  and  harder,  the 
pope  determined  to  have  St.  Peter  himself  address  the 
dilatory  king.  .Accordingly,  he  sent  now  the  following 
letter :  — 

"I,  Peter  the  apostle,  protest,  admonish,  and  conjure  you,  the  most 
Christian  kings,  Pepin,  Charles,  and  Carloman,  with  all  the  hierarchy, 
bishops,  abbots,  priests,  and  all  monks  ;  all  judges,  dukes,  counts,  and 
the  whole  people  of  the  Franks.  The  M'otfrer  of  God  likewise  adjures 
you,  and  admonishes  and  commands  you,  she  as  well  as  the  thrones  and 
dominions,  and  all  the  hosts  of  heaven,  to  save  the  beloved  city  of  Rome 
from  the  detested  Lombards.  If  ye  hasten,  I,  Peter  the  apostle,  promise 
you  my  protection  in  this  life  and  in  the  next,  will  prepare  for  you  the 
most  glorious  mansions  in  heaven,  will  bestow  on  you  the  everlasting 
joys  of  paradise.  Make  common  cause  with  my  people  of  Rome,  and  I 
will  grant  whatever  ye  may  pray  for.  I  conjure  you  not  to  yield  up  this 
city  to  be  lacerated  and  tormented  by  the  Lombards,  lest  your  own  souls 
be  lacerated  and  tormented  in  hell,  with  the  devil  and  his  pestilential 
angels.  Of  all  nations  under  heaven,  the  Franks  are  highest  in  the 
esteem  of  St.  Peter  ;  to  me  you  owe  all  your  victories.  Obey,  and  obey 
speedily,  and,  by  my  suffrage,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  will  give  you  in  this 

""/</.,  par.  28. 


562       TUB  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

life  length  of  days,  security,  victory  ;  in  the  life  to  come,  will  multiply 
his  blessings  upon  you,  among  his  saints  and  angels."63 

This  aroused  Pepin  to  the  most  diligent  activity.  As- 
tolph  heard  he  was  coming,  and  hastened  back  to  his  capital ; 
but  scarcely  had  he  reached  it  before  Pepin  was  besieging 
him  there.  Astolph  yielded  at  once,  and  gave  up  to  Pepin 
the  whole  disputed  territory.  Representatives  of  the  em- 
peror of  the  East  were  there  to  demand  that  it  be  restored  to 
him;  but  "  Pepin  declared  that,  his  sole  object  in  the  war 
was  to  show  his  veneration  for  St.  Peter  ;  "  and  as  the  spoils 
of  conquest,  he  bestowed  the  whole  of  it  upon  the  pope  — 
A.  D.  755.  "The  representatives  of  the  pope,  who,  how- 
ever, always  speak  of  the  republic  of  Rome,  passed  through 
the  land,  receiving  the  homage  of  the  authorities,  and  the 
keys  of  the  cities.  The  district  comprehended  Ravenna, 
Rimini,  Pesaro,  Fano,  Cesena,  Sinigaglia,  lesi,  Forlimpopoli, 
Forli  with  the  Castle  Sussibio,  Montefeltro,  Acerra,  Monte 
di  Lucano,  Serra,  San  Marino,  Bobbio,  Urbino,  Cagli,  Lu- 
ciolo,  Gubbio,  Comachio,  arid  Narni,  which  was  severed 
from  the  dukedom  of  Spoleto. '" 

Astolph  was  soon  afterward  killed  while  hunting.  The 
succession  was  disputed  between  Desiderius  and  Rachis. 
Desiderius  secured  the  throne  by  courting  the  influence  of 
the  pope,  and  in  return  the  pope  compelled  him  to  agree  to 
surrender  to  the  papacy  five  cities,  and  the  whole  duchy  of 
Ferrara  besides.  The  agreement  was  afterward  fulfilled, 
and  these  territories  were  added  to  the  kingdom  of  the 
pope. 

Stephen  III  died  April  26,  757,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  brother  Paul.  Paul  glorified  Pepin  as  a  new  Moses,  who 
had  freed  Israel  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt.  As  Moses  had 
confounded  idolatry,  so  had  Pepin  confounded  heresy  ;  and 
he  rapturously  exclaimed,  "Thou,  after  God,  art  our  defender 
and  aider.  If  all  the  hairs  of  our  heads  were  tongues,  we 
could  not  give  you  thanks  equal  to  your  deserts," 

63 /<*.,  par.  31. 


THE  POPE  MAKES   CHARLEMAGNE  EMPEROR.         563 

All  the  donations  which  Pepin  had  bestowed  upon  the 
papacy  were  received  and  held  by  the  popes,  under  the  pious 
fiction  that  they  were  for  such  holy  uses  as  keeping  up  the 
lights  in  the  churches,  and  maintaining  the  poor.  But  in  fact 
they  were  held  as  the  dominions  of  the  new  sovereign  State 
descended  from  the  Roman  republic,  the  actual  authority  of 
which  had  now  become  merged  in  the  pope,  and  by  right  of 
which  the  pope  had  already  made  Charles  a  Roman  consul, 
and  Pepin  a  patrician.  All  these  territories  the  pope  ruled 
as  sovereign.  He  ' '  took  possession  as  lord  and  master  ;  he 
received  the  homage  of  the  authorities  and  the  keys  of  the 
cities.  The  local  or  municipal  institutions  remained  ;  but  the 
revenue,  which  had  before  been  received  by  the  Byzantine 
crown,  became  the  revenue  of  the  church  :  of  that  revenue  the 
pope  was  the  guardian,  distributor,  possessor."  —  Milma/ii.tA 

In  A.  D.  768,  Pepin  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  two 
sons,  Charles  and  Carloman.  In  T71  Carloman  died,  leaving 
Charles  sole  king,  who  by  his  remarkable  ability  became 
Charles  the  Great, —  Charlemagne, —  and  reigned  forty-six 
years, —  forty-three  from  the  death  of  Carloman, —  thirty- 
three  of  which  were  spent  in  almost  ceaseless  wars. 

Charlemagne  was  a  no  less  devout  Catholic  than  was 
Clovis  before  him.  His  wars  against  the  pagan  Saxons  were 
almost  wholly  wars  of  religion  ;  and  his  stern  declaration 
that  "these  Saxons  must  be  Christianized  or  wiped  out," 
expresses  the  temper  both  of  his  religion  and  of  his  warfare. 
He  completed  the  conquest  of  Lombardy,  and  placed  upon 
his  own  head  the  iron  crown  of  the  kingdom,  and  confirmed 
to  the  papacy  the  donation  of  territory  which  Pepin  had 
made.  He  extinguished  the  exarchate  of  Ravenna,  and  its 
territory  ' '  by  his  grant  was  vested,  either  as  a  kind  of  feud 
or  in  absolute  perpetuity,  in  the  pope." — Milman.65 

It  seems  almost  certain  that  Charlemagne  really  aspired 
to  consolidate  the  territories  of  the  West  into  a  grand  new 
Roman  empire.  Saxony,  Bohemia,  Bavaria,  Pannonia,  the 

par.  41.  ^/c/.,  chap,  xii,  par.  16. 


562  TUE  SUPREMACY  OF   THE  PAPACY. 

life  length  of  days,  security,  victory  ;  in  the  life  to  come,  will  multiply 
his  blessings  upon  you,  among  his  saints  and  angels."63 

This  aroused  Pepin  to  the  most  diligent  activity.  As- 
tolph  heard  he  was  coming,  and  hastened  back  to  his  capital ; 
but  scarcely  had  he  reached  it  before  Pepin  was  besieging 
him  there.  Astolph  yielded  at  once,  and  gave  up  to  Pepin 
the  whole  disputed  territory.  Representatives  of  the  em- 
peror of  the  East  were  there  to  demand  that  it  be  restored  to 
him;  but  "  Pepin  declared  that,  his  sole  object  in  the  war 
was  to  show  his  veneration  for  St.  Peter  ; "  and  as  the  spoils 
of  conquest,  he  bestowed  the  whole  of  it  upon  the  pope  — 
A.  D.  755.  "The  representatives  of  the  pope,  who,  how- 
ever, always  speak  of  the  republic  of  Rome,  passed  through 
the  land,  receiving  the  homage  of  the  authorities,  and  the 
keys  of  the  cities.  The  district  comprehended  Ravenna, 
Rimini,  Pesaro,  Fano,  Cesena,  Sinigaglia,  lesi,  Forlimpopoli, 
Forli  with  the  Castle  Sussibio,  Montefeltro,  Acerra,  Monte 
di  Lucano,  Serra,  San  Marino,  Bobbio,  Urbino,  Cagli,  Lu- 
ciolo,  Gubbio,  Comachio,  and  j^arni,  which  was  severed 
from  the  dukedom  of  Spoleto. " 

Astolph  was  soon  afterward  killed  while  hunting.  The 
succession  was  disputed  between  Desiderius  and  Rachis. 
Desiderius  secured  the  throne  by  courting  the  influence  of 
the  pope,  and  in  return  the  pope  compelled  him  to  agree  to 
surrender  to  the  papacy  five  cities,  and  the  whole  duchy  of 
Ferrara  besides.  The  agreement  was  afterward  fulfilled, 
and  these  territories  were  added  to  the  kingdom  of  the 
pope. 

Stephen  III  died  April  26,  757,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  brother  Paul.  Paul  glorified  Pepin  as  a  new  Moses,  who 
had  freed  Israel  from  the  bondage  of  Egypt.  As  Moses  had 
confounded  idolatry,  so  had  Pepin  confounded  heresy  ;  and 
he  rapturously  exclaimed,  "Thou,  after  God,  art  our  defender 
and  aider.  If  all  the  hairs  of  our  heads  were  tongues,  we 
could  not  give  you  thanks  equal  to  your  deserts." 

63 Id.,  par.  31. 


THE  POPE  MAKES   CHARLEMAGNE  EMPEROR.         563 

All  the  donations  which  Pepin  had  bestowed  upon  the 
papacy  were  received  and  held  by  the  popes,  under  the  pious 
fiction  that  they  were  for  such  holy  uses  as  keeping  up  the 
lights  in  the  churches,  and  maintaining  the  poor.  But  in  fact 
they  were  held  as  the  dominions  of  the  new  sovereign  State 
descended  from  the  Roman  republic,  the  actual  authority  of 
which  had  now  become  merged  in  the  pope,  and  by  right  of 
which  the  pope  had  already  made  Charles  a  Roman  consul, 
and  Pepin  a  patrician.  All  these  territories  the  pope  ruled 
as  sovereign.  He  ' '  took  possession  as  lord  and  master  ;  he 
received  the  homage  of  the  authorities  and  the  keys  of  the 
cities.  The  local  or  municipal  institutions  remained  ;  but  the 
revenue,  which  had  before  been  received  by  the  Byzantine 
crown,  became  the  revenue  of  the  church  :  of  that  revenue  the 
pope  was  the  guardian,  distributor,  possessor."  —Jfilman.6* 

In  A.  D.  768,  Pepin  died,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  two 
sons,  Charles  and  Carloman.  In  771  Carloman  died,  leaving 
Charles  sole  king,  wrho  by  his  remarkable  ability  became 
Charles  the  Great, —  Charlemagne,—  and  reigned  forty-six 
years, —  forty-three  from  the  death  of  Carloman,  —  thirty- 
three  of  which  were  spent  in  almost  ceaseless  wars. 

Charlemagne  was  a  no  less  devout  Catholic  than  was 
Clovis  before  him.  His  wars  against  the  pagan  Saxons  were 
almost  wholly  wars  of  religion  ;  and  his  stern  declaration 
that  "these  Saxons  must  be  Christianized  or  wiped  out," 
expresses  the  temper  both  of  his  religion  and  of  his  warfare. 
He  completed  the  conquest  of  Lombardy,  and  placed  upon 
his  own  head  the  iron  crown  of  the  kingdom,  and  confirmed 
to  the  papacy  the  donation  of  territory  which  Pepin  had 
made.  He  extinguished  the  exarchate  of  Ravenna,  and  its 
territory  "by  his  grant  was  vested,  either  as  a  kind  of  feud 
or  in  absolute  perpetuity,  in  the  pope." — Milman.65 

It  seems  almost  certain  that  Charlemagne  really  aspired 
to  consolidate  the  territories  of  the  West  into  a  grand  new 
Roman  empire.  Saxony,  Bohemia,  Bavaria,  Pannonia,  the 

64  Id.,  par.  41.  ^  Id.,  chap,  xii,  par.  16. 


566      TEE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

poured  out  their  demoniacal  wrath  upon  the  innocent 
Albigenses,  the  devoted  Waldenses,  and  the  millions  of 
other  Christians  who  by  sword,  by  captivity,  by  dungeon, 
by  rack,  by  torture,  and  by  flame,  yielded  their  lives  rather 
than  submit  to  this  horrible  despotism  over  the  bodies  and 
souls,  the  actions  and  the  thoughts,  of  men,  choosing  rather 
to  die  the  free  men  of  Christ,  than  to  live  the  slaves  of  that 
filthy  strumpet  who  has  "deluged  Europe  and  Asia  with 
blood"  (Gibbon6*) '&&&  whom  the  holy  seer  of  Patmos  saw 
"drunken  with  the  blood  of  the  saints,  and  the  blood  of  the 
martyrs  of  Jesus."  Rev.  xvii,  1-6. 

And  even  the  Inquisition  in  its  practical  workings,  is  but 
the  logic  of  the  theocratical  theory  upon  which  the  papacy  is 
founded.  God  is  the  moral  governor.  His  government  is 
moral  only,  whose  code  is  the  moral  law.  His  government 
and  his  law  have  to  do  with  the  thoughts,  the  intents,  and 
the  secrets  of  men's  hearts.  This  must  be  ever  the  govern- 
ment of  God,  and  nothing  short  of  it  can  be  the  govern- 
ment of  God.  The  papacy  then  being  the  head  of  what 
pretends  to  be  a  government  of  God,  and  ruling  there  in  the 
place  of  God,  her  government  must  rule  in  the  realm  of 
morals,  and  must  take  cognizance  of  the  counsels  of  the 
heart.  But  being  composed  of  men,  how  can  she  discover 
what  are  the  thoughts  of  men's  hearts  whether  they  be  good 
or  evil,  that  she  may  pronounce  judgment  upon  them?  By 
long  and  careful  experiment,  and  by  intense  ingenuity, 
means  were  discovered  by  which  the  most  secret  thoughts 
of  men's  hearts  might  be  wrung  from  them,  and  that  was  by 
the  confessional  first,  and  especially  for  those  who  submit  to 
her  authority  ;  and  by  the  thumbscrew,  the  rack,  and  her  other 
horrible  tortures  second,  and  for  those  who  would  not  sub- 
mit—  in  one  word  it  was  by  the  Inquisition  that  it  was 
accomplished. 

There  remained  but  one  thing  more  to  make  the  enor- 
mity complete,  and  that  was  not  only  to  sanction  but  to  deify 

68  "  Decline  and  Fall,"  chap,  xlv,  par.  22. 


THE   GERM  OF   THE  ENTIRE  PAPACY.  56 7 

the  whole  deceitful,  licentious,  and  bloody  record,  with  the 
assertion  of  infallibility.  As  all  the  world  knows,  this  too 
has  been  done.  And  even  this  is  but  the  logic  of  the  theo- 
cratical  theory  upon  wliich  the  foundation  of  the  paj>acy  was 
laid  in  the  days  of  Constantino.  For,  the  papacy  being  pro- 
fessedly the  government  of  God,  he  who  sits  at  the  head  of 
it,  sits  there  as  the  representative  of  God.  He  represents 
the  divine  authority  ;  and  when  he  speaks  or  acts  officially, 
his  speech  or  act  is  that  of  God.  But  to  make  a  man  thus 
the  representative  of  God,  is  only  to  clothe  human  passions 
with  divine  power  and  authority.  And  being  human,  he  is 
bound  always  to  act  unlike  God  ;  and  being  clothed  with 
irresponsible  power,  he  will  often  act  like  the  devil.  Conse- 
quently, in  order  to  make  all  his  actions  consistent  with  his 
profession,  he  is  compelled  to  cover  them  all  with  the  divine 
attributes,  and  make  everything  that  he  does  in  his  official 
capacity  the  act  of  God.  This  is  precisely  the  logic  and  the 
profession  of  papal  infallibility.  It  is  not  claimed  that  all 
the  pope  speaks  is  infallible  ;  it  is  only  what  he  speaks  offi- 
cially—  \vhat  he  speaks  ex  cathedra,  that  is,  from  the  throne. 
The  decree  of  infallibility  is  as  follows  :  — 

"We  teach  and  define  that  it  is  a  dogma  divinely  revealed,  that  the 
Roman  pontiff,  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra,  that  is,  when  in  discharge 
of  the  office  of  pastor  and  doctor  of  all  Christians,  by  virtue  of  his 
supreme  apostolic  authority,  he  defines  a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or 
morals  to  be  held  by  the  universal  church,  by  the  divine  assistance 
promised  to  him  in  blessed  Peter,  is  possessed  of  that  infallibility  with 
which  the  divine  Redeemer  willed  that  his  church  should  be  endowed  for 
defining  doctrines  regarding  faith  or  morals  ;  and  that  therefore  such 
definitions  of  the  Roman  pontiff  are  irreformable  of  themselves,  and  not 
from  the  consent  of  the  church. 

"  But  if  any  one  — which  may  God  avert  —  presume  to  contradict  this 
our  definition,  let  him  be  anathema. 

"Given  at  Rome  in  public  session  solemnly  held  in  the  Vatican  Ba- 
silica in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy,  on 
the  eighteenth  day  of  July,  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  our  pontificate."69 

69Schaff's  "  History  of  the  Vatican  Council,"  Decrees,  chap.  iv.  The  "ponti- 
ficate "  is  that  of  Pius  IX. 


568  THE  SUPREMACY  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

Under  this  theory,  he  sits  upon  that  throne  as  the  head 
of  the  government  of  God,  and  he  sits  there  as  God  indeed. 
For  the  same  pope  that  published  this  dogma  of  infallibility, 
published  a  book  of  his  speeches,  in  the  preface  to  which,  in 
the  official  and  approved  edition,  he  is  declared  to  be  "The 
living  Christ,"  "The  voice  of  God;"  "He  is  nature  that 
protests;  he  is  God  that  condemns."70  Thus,  in  the  pa- 
pacy there  is  fulfilled  to  the  letter,  in  completest  meaning, 
the  prophecy  —  2  Thess.  ii,  1-9  —  of  "  the  falling  away  "  and 
the  revealing  of  "that  man  of  sin,"  "the  son  of  perdition, 
who  opposeth  and  exalteth  himself  above  all  that  is  called 
God,  or  that  is  worshiped  ;  so  that  he  as  God  sitteth  in  the 
temple  of  God,  showing  himself  that  he  is  God." 

Therefore,  sitting  in  the  place  of  God,  ruling  from  that 
place  as  God,  that  which  he  speaks  from  the  throne  is  the 
word  of  God,  and  must  be  infallible.  This  is  the  inevit- 
able logic  of  the  false  theocratical  theory.  And  if  it  be 
denied  that  the  theory  is  false,  there  is  logically  no  escape 
from  accepting  the  whole  papal  system. 

Thus  so  certainly  and  so  infallibly  is  it  true  that  the  false 
and  grossly  conceived  view  of  the  Old-Testament  theocracy, 
contains  within  it  the  germ,  of  THE  ENTIRE  PAPACY.  n 


70  Speeches  of  Pope  Pius  IX,  pp.  9,  17;  Gladstone's  Review,  p.  6. 

71  Neander's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,"  Vol.  ii,  Section 
Second,  part  i,  div.  ii,  par.  29. 


CHAPTER   XXIII. 


PROTESTANTISM  — TRUE    AND   FALSE. 

THEN  came  the  Eeformation,  protesting  against  the  papal 
system,  and  asserting  again  the  rights  of  the  individual 
conscience,  declaring  for  a  separation  between  Church  and 
State,  and  that  to  Caesar  is  to  be  rendered  only  that  which 
is  Caesar's,  while  men  are  left  free  to  render  to  God,  accord- 
ing to  the  dictates  of  their  own  conscience,  that  which  is 
God's. 

To  Luther  more  than  to  any  other  one,  there  fell  the 
blessed  task  of  opening  up  the  contest  with  the  papacy,  and 
of  announcing  the  principles  of  Protestantism.  It  is  not 
without  cause  that  Luther  stands  at  the  head  of  „ all  men  in 
the  great  Reformation  and  in  the  history  of  Protestantism : 
for  he  alone  of  all  the  leaders  in  the  Reformation  times  held 
himself  and  his  cause  aloof  from  the  powers  of  this  world, 
and  declined  all  connection  of  the  State  with  the  work  of 
the  gospel,  even  to  support  it.  After  he  had  burnt  the 
pope's  bull,  Aleander,  the  pope's^nuncio,  at  the  coronation 
of  Charles  Y  at  Cologne,  addressed  the  elector,  Frederick 
of  Saxony,  whose  subject  Luther  was,  in  these  words  :  — 

"Seethe  immense  perils  to  which  this  man  exposes  the  Christian 
commonwealth.  If  a  remedy  is  not  speedily  applied,  the  empire  is 
destroyed.  What  ruined  the  Greeks,  if  it  was  not  their  abandonment  of 
the  pope  ?  You  cannot  remain  united  to  Luther  without  separating 
from  Jesus  Christ.  In  the  name  of  his  Holiness,  I  ask  of  you  two 
things  :  first,  to  burn  the  writings  of  Luther ;  secondly,  to  punish  him 
according  to  his  demerits,  or  at  least  to  give  him  up  a  prisoner  to  the 

[569] 


570  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

pope.     The  emperor,  and  all  the  princes  of  the  empire,  have  declared 
their  readiness  to  accede  to  our  demands  ;  you  alone  still  hesitate." l 

The  elector  answered  just  then,  that  this  was  a  matter  of 
too  much  importance  to  be  decided  upon  the  spur  of  the 
moment,  and  at  a  later  time  he  would  give  a  definite  an- 
swer. At  this  time  Luther  wrote  to  Spalatiu,  the  elector's 
chaplain,  these  words  :  — 

"If  the  gospel  was  of  a  nature  to  be  propagated  or  maintained  by 
the  power  of  the  world,  God  would  not  have  intrusted  it  to  fishermen. 
To  defend  the  gospel  appertains  not  to  the  princes  and  pontiffs  of  this 
world.  They  have  enough  to  do  to  shelter  themselves  from  the  judg- 
ments of  the  Lord  and  his  Anointed.  If  I  speak,  I  do  it  in  order  that 
they  may  obtain  the  knowledge  of  the  divine  word,  and  be  saved  by  it."2 

As  Luther  was  on  his  way  home  from  the  Diet  of  Worms, 
where  he  made  his  memorable  defense,  Frederick  had  him 
captured  and  carried  away  to  the  Wartburg,  where  he  was 
kept  in  confinement  to  protect  him  from  the  wrath  of  the 
papacy,  which,  through  the  imperial  power,  was  expressed 
in  the  following  words  :  — 

"  We,  Charles  the  Fifth,  to  all  the  electors,  princes,  prelates,  and 
others,  whom  it  may  concern:  — 

"The  Almighty  having  intrusted  to  us,  for  the  defense  of  his  holy 
faith,  more  kingdoms  and  power  than  he  gave  to  any  of  our  predeces- 
sors, we  mean  to  exert  ourselves  to  the  utmost  to  prevent  any  heresy  from 
arising  to  pollute  our  holy  empire. 

"  The  Augustine  monk,  Martin  Luther,  though  exhorted  by  us,  has 
rushed,  like  a  madman,  against  the  holy  church,  and  sought  to  destroy 
it  by  means  of  books  filled  with  blasphemy.  He  has,  in  a  shameful 
manner,  insulted  the  imperishable  law  of  holy  wedlock.  He  has  striven 
to  excite  the  laity  to  wash  their  hands  in  the  blood  of  priests  ;  and,  over- 
turning all  obedience,  has  never  ceased  to  stir  up  revolt,  division,  war, 
murder,  theft,  and  fire,  and  to  labor  completely  to  ruin  the  faith  of 
Christians.  ...  In  a  word,  to  pass  over  all  his  other  iniquities  in  silence, 
this  creature,  who  is  not  a  man,  but  Satan  himself  under  the  form  of  a 
man,  covered  with  the  cowl  of  a  monk,  has  collected  into  one  stinking 

1  D'Aubigne's  "  History  of  the  Reformation,"  book  vi,  chap,  xi,  par.  9. 
2Jd.,  par.  13, 


THE  PAPAL  POWER  AND  LUTHER'S  PROTECTION.     571 

pool  all  the  worst  heresies  of  past  times,  and  has  added  several  new  ones 
of  his  own.  .  .  . 

"We  have  therefore  sent  this  Luther  from  before  our  face,  that  all 
pious  and  sensible  men  may  regard  him  as  a  fool,  or  a  man  possessed  of 
the  devil ;  and  we  expect  that,  after  the  expiry  of  his  safe-conduct, 
effectual  means  will  be  taken  to  arrest  his  furious  rage. 

"Wherefore,  under  pain  of  incurring  the  punishment  due  to  the 
crime  of  treason,  we  forbid  you  to  lodge  the  said  Luther  so  soon  as  the 
fatal  term  shall  be  expired,  to  conceal  him,  give  him  meat  or  drink,  and 
lend  him  by  word  or  deed,  publicly  or  secretly,  any  kind  of  assistance. 
We  enjoin  you,  moreover,  to  seize  him,  or  cause  him  to  be  seized,  wher- 
ever you  find  him,  and  bring  him  to  us  without  any  delay,  or  to  keep 
him  in  all  safety  until  you  hear  from  us  how  you  are  to  act  with  regard 
to  him,  and  till  you  receive  the  recompense  due  to  your  exertions  in  so 
holy  a  work. 

"As  to  his  adherents,  you  will  seize  them,  suppress  them,  and  con- 
fiscate their  goods. 

"As  to  his  writings,  if  the  best  food  becomes  the  terror  of  all  man- 
kind as  soon  as  a  drop  of  poison  is  mixed  with  it,  how  much  more  ought 
these  books,  which  contain  a  deadly  poison  to  the  soul,  to  be  not  only 
rejected,  but  also  annihilated  !  You  will  therefore  burn  them,  or  in 
some  other  way  destroy  them  entirely. 

"As  to  authors,  poets,  printers,  painters,  sellers  or  buyers  of  pla- 
cards, writings,  or  paintings  against  the  pope  or  the  church,  you  will  lay 
hold  of  their  persons  and  their  goods,  and  treat  them  according  to  your 
good  pleasure. 

"And  if  any  one,  whatever  be  his  dignity,  shall  dare  to  act  in  con- 
tradiction to  the  decree  of  our  imperial  majesty,  we  ordain  that  he  shall 
be  placed  under  the  ban  of  the  empire. 

"Let  every  one  conform  hereto."  3 

Luther  remained  in  the  Wartburg  until  March  3,  1522, 
when  without  permission  from  anybody,  he  left  and  returned 
to  Wittemberg.  Knowing  that  his  leaving  the  Wartburg  with- 
out saying  anything  to  the  elector,  would  be  ungrateful,  and 
knowing  also  that  his  returning  at  all  was  virtually  disclaim- 
ing the  elector's  protection,  he  addressed  to  him,  the  third 
day  of  his  journey,  the  following  letter  :  — 

"Grace  and  peace  from  God  our  Father,  and  from  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

3  Id.,  book  vii,  chap,  xi,  par.  13. 
44 


572  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

"Most  serene  elector,  gracious  lord:  What  has  happened  at  Wit- 
temberg,  to  the  great  shame  of  the  gospel,  has  filled  me  with  such  grief, 
that  if  I  were  not  certain  of  the  truth  of  our  cause,  I  would  have  despaired 
of  it. 

"Your  Highness  knows — or  if  not,  please  to  be  informed  —  I  re- 
ceived the  gospel  not  from  men,  but  from  heaven,  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  If  I  have  asked  for  conferences,  it  was  not  because  I  had  doubts 
of  the  truth,  but  from  humility,  and  for  the  purpose  of  winning  ."others. 
But  since  my  humility  is  turned  against  the  gospel,  my  conscience  now 
impels  me  to  act  in  a  different  manner.  I  have  yielded  enough  to  your 
Highness  in  exiling  myself  during  this  year.  The  devil  knows  it  was  not 
from  fear  I  did  it.  I  would  have  entered  Worms,  though  there  had  been 
as  many  devils  in  the  town  as  there  were  tiles  on  the  roofs.  Now  Duke 
George,  with  whom  your  Highness  tries  so  much  to  frighten  me,  is  far 
less  to  be  feared  than  a  single  devil.  Had  that  which  has  taken  place  at 
Wittemberg  taken  place  at  Leipsic  (the  duke's  residence),  I  would  in- 
stantly have  mounted  my  horse  and  gone  thither,  even  though  (let  your 
Highness  pardon  the  expression)  for  nine  days  it  should  have  done  nothing 
but  rain  Duke  Georges,  and  every  one  of  them  been  nine  times  more  furious 
than  he  is.  What  is  he  thinking  of  in  attacking  me  ?  Does  he  take 
Christ,  my  Lord,  for  a  man  of  straw  ?  The  Lord  be  pleased  to  avert  the 
dreadful  judgment  which  is  impending  over  him. 

"It  is  necessary  for  your  Highness  to  know  that  I  am  on  my  way  to 
Wittemberg,  under  a  more  powerful  protection  than  that  of  an  elector. 
I  have  no  thought  of  soliciting  the  assistance  of  your  Highness  ;  so  far 
from  desiring  your  protection,  I  would  rather  give  you  mine.  If  I  knew 
that  your  Highness  could  or  would  protect  me,  I  would  not  come  to  Wit- 
temberg. No  sword  can  give  any  aid  to  this  cause.  God  alone  must  do 
all  without  human  aid  or  co-operation.  He  who  has  most  faith  is  the  best 
protector.  Now,  I  observe  that  your  Highness  is  still  very  weak  in  the 
faith. 

"  But  since  your  Highness  desires  to  know  what  to  do,  I^will  answer 
with  all  humility.  Your  electoral  Highness  has  already  done  too  much, 
and  ought  to  do  nothing  at  all.  God  does  not  wish,  and  cannot  tolerate, 
either  your  cares  and  labors,  or  mine.  Let  your  Highness,  therefore,  act 
accordingly. 

"In  regard  to  what  concerns  myself,  your  Highness  must  act  as  elec- 
tor. You  must  allow  the  orders  of  his  Imperial  Majesty  to  be  executed 
in  your  towns  and  rural  districts.  You  must  not  throw  any  difficulty  in 
the  way,  should  it  be  wished  to  apprehend  or  slay  me  ;  for  none  must 
oppose  the  powers  that  be,  save  He  who  established  them. 

"  Let  your  Highness,  then,  leave  the  gates  open,  and  respect  safe- 
conducts,  should  my  enemies  themselves,  or  their  envoys,  enter  the 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  PROTESTANTISM.  573 

States  of  your  Highness  in  search  of  me.     In  this  way  you  will  avoid  all 
embarrassment  and  danger. 

"I  have  written  this  letter  in  haste,  that  you  may  not  be  disconcerted 
on  learning  my  arrival.  He  with  whom  I  have  to  deal  is  a  different  per- 
son from  Duke  George.  He  knows  me  well,  and  I  know  something  of 
Him. 

"  Your  electoral  Highness's  most  humble  servant, 

"  MARTIN  LUTHER.* 
"  Borna,  the  Conductor  Hotel,  Ash -Wednesday,  1522." 

During  his  absence,  fanatical  spirits  had  arisen,  and 
extreme  and  somewhat  violent  steps  had  been  taken,  and 
amongst  the  first  words  which  he  spoke  upon  his  arrival  in 
Wittemberg  were  these  :  —  • 

"It  is  by  the  word  that  we  must  fight ;  by  the  word  overturn  and 
destroy  what  has  been  established  by  violence.  I  am  unwilling  to 
employ  force  against  the  superstitious  or  the  unbelieving.  Let  him  who 
believes  approach  ;  let  him  who  believes  not  stand  aloof.  None  ought 
to  be  constrained.  Liberty  is  of  the  essence  of  faith."5 

In  1524  the  Swabian  peasants  revolted,  and  in  January, 
1525,  Luther  addressed  to  them  the  following  words  :  — 

"The  pope  and  the  emperor  have  united  against  me  ;  but  the  more 
the  pope  and  the  emperor  have  stormed,  the  greater  the  progress  which 
the  gospel  has  made.  .  .  .  Why  so  ?  Because  I  have  never  drawn  the 
sword,  nor  called  for  vengeance  ;  because  I  have  not  had  recourse  either 
to  tumult  or  revolt.  I  have  committed  all  to  God,  and  awaited  his  strong 
hand.  It  is  neither  with  the  sword  nor  the  musket  that  Christians  fight, 
but  with  suffering  and  the  cross.  Christ,  their  captain,  did  not  handle 
the  sword  ;  he  hung  upon  the  tree."6 

And  when,  June  25,  A.  D.  1530,  the  memorable  confes- 
sion of  Protestanism  was  made  at  Augsburg,  that  confession, 
framed  under  the  direction  of  Luther,  though  absent,  accord- 
ingly announced  for  all  future  time  the  principles  of  Prot- 
estantism upon  the  subject  of  Church  and  State.  Upon  this 
question  that  document  declared  as  follows  :  — 

tld.,  book  ix,  chap,  viil,  par.  14.  6  Id.,  par.  22. 

6  Id.,  book  x,  chaj).  x,  par.  19. 


PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

' '  ARTICLE    XXVIII. 
"  OF    ECCLESIASTICAL    POWER. 

"  There  have  been  great  controversies  touching  the  power  of  the 
bishops,  in  which  some  have  in  an  unseemly  manner  mingled  together  the 
ecclesiastical  power,  and  the  power  of  the  sword.  And  out  of  this  con- 
fusion there  have  sprung  very  great  wars  and  tumults,  while  the  pontiffs, 
trusting  in  the  power  of  the  keys,  have  not  only  instituted  new  kinds 
of  service,  and  burdened  men's  consciences  by  reserving  of  cases,  and 
by  violent  excommunications ;  but  have  also  endeavored  to  transfer 
worldly  kingdoms  from  one  to  another,  and  to  despoil  emperors  of  their 
power  and  authority.  These  faults  godly  and  learned  men  in  the  church 
have  long  since  reprehended  ;  and  for  that  cause  ours  were  compelled, 
for  the  comforting  of  men^  consciences,  to  show  the  difference  between 
the  ecclesiastical  power  and  the  power  of  the  sword.  And  they  have 
taught  that  both  of  them,  because  of  God's  command,  are  dutifully  to  be 
reverenced  and  honored,  as  the  chief  blessings  of  God  upon  earth. 

"Now,  their  judgment  is  this  :  that  the  power  of  the  keys,  or  the 
power  of  the  bishops,  according  to  the  gospel,  is  a  power  or  command 
from  God,  of  preaching  the  gospel,  of  remitting  or  retaining  sins,  and  of 
administering  the  sacraments.  For  Christ  sends  his  apostles  forth  with 
this  charge  :  '  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  Receive 
ye  the  Holy  Ghost  :  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto 
them  ;  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained.'  John  xx, 
21-23.  '  Go,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,'  etc.  Mark  xvi,  15. 

"This  power  is  exercised  only  by  teaching  or  preaching  the  gospel, 
and  administering  the  sacraments,  either  to  many,  or  to  single  individ- 
uals, in  accordance  with  their  call.  For  thereby  not  corporeal,  but 
eternal  things  are  granted  ;  as,  an  eternal  righteousness,  the  Holy  Ghost, 
life  everlasting.  These  things  cannot  be  obtained  but  by  the  ministry  of 
the  word  and  of  the  sacraments  ;  as  Paul  says,  '  The  gospel  is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth.'  Rom.  i,  16.  See- 
ing, then,  that  the  ecclesiastical  power  bestows  things  eternal,  and  is  ex- 
ercised only  by  the  ministry  of  the  word,  it  does  not  hinder  the  civil 
government  any  more  than  the  art  of  singing  hinders  civil  government. 
For  the  civil  administration  is  occupied  about  other  matters,  than  is  the 
gospel.  The  magistracy  does  not  defend  the  souls,  but  the  bodies,  and 
bodily  things,  against  manifest  injuries  ;  and  coerces  men  by  the  sword 
and  corporal  punishments,  that  it  may  uphold  civil  justice  and  peace. 

"Wherefore  the  ecclesiastical  and  the  civil  power  are  not  to  be  con- 
founded. The  ecclesiastical  power  has  its  own  command,  to  preach  the 
gospel  and  to  administer  the  sacraments.  Let  it  not  by  force  enter  into 
the  office  of  another ;  let  it  not  transfer  worldly  kingdoms ;  let  it  not 


PROTESTANTISM  IS  CHRISTIANITY. 

abrogate  the  magistrates'  laws  ;  let  it  not  withdraw  from  them  lawful 
obedience  ;  let  it  not  hinder  judgments  touching  any  civil  ordinances  or 
contracts;  let  it  not  prescribe  laws  to  the  magistrate  touching  the  form  of 
the  State;  as  Christ  says,  'My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world.'  John 
xviii,  36.  Again  :  'Who  made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over  you?' 
Luke  xii,  14.  And  Paul  says,  'Our  conversation  is  in  heaven.'  Phil, 
iii,  20.  '  The  weapons  of  our  warfare  are  not  carnal,  but  mighty 
through  God,  to  the  pulling  down  of  strongholds ;  casting  down  imagi- 
nations, '  etc.  2  Cor.  x,  4,  5. 

"  In  this  way  ours  distinguish  between  the  duties  of  each  power,  one 
from  the  other,  and  admonish  all  men  to  honor  both  powers,  and  to  ac- 
knowledge both  to  be  the  gifts  and  blessings  of  God. 

"If  the  bishops  have  any  power  of  the  sword,  they  have  it  not  as 
bishops  by  the  command  of  the  gospel,  but  by  human  law  given 
unto  them  by  kings  and  emperors,  for  the  civil  government  of  their 
goods.  This,  however,  is  another  function  than  the  ministry  of  the 
gospel. 

"  When,  therefore,  the  question  is  concerning  the  jurisdiction  of 
bishops,  civil  government  must  be  distinguished  from  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction. Again,  according  to  the  gospel,  or,  as  they  term  it,  by  divine 
right,  bishops,  as  bishops,  that  is,  those  who  have  the  administration  of 
the  word  and  sacraments  committed  to  them,  have  no  other  jurisdiction  at 
all,  but  only  to  remit  sin,  also  to  inquire  into  doctrine,  and  to  reject 
doctrine  inconsistent  with  the  gospel,  and  to  exclude  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  church  wicked  men,  whose  wickedness  is  manifest, 
without  human  force,  but  by  the  word.  And  herein  of  necessity  the 
churches  ought  by  divine  right  to  render  obedience  unto  them  ;  accord- 
ing to  the  saying  of  Christ,  '  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me.'  Luke 
x,  16.  But  when  they  teach  or  determine  anything  contrary  to  the  gos- 
pel, then  the  churches  have  a  command  of  God  which  forbids  obedience 
to  them:  'Beware  of  false  prophets.'  Matt,  vii,  15.  'Though  an 
angel  from  heaven  preach  any  other  gospel,  let  him  be  accursed. '  Gal. 
i,  8.  'We  can  do  nothing  against  the  truth,  but  for  the  truth.'  2  Cor. 
xiii,  8.  Also,  'This  power  the  Lord  hath  given  me  to  edification,  and 
not  to  destruction.'  2  Cor.  xiii,  10." 

This  confession  is  a  sound  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  concerning  the  temporal  and  the  spiritual  powers.  It 
clearly  and  correctly  defines  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State  to 
be  only  in  things  civil ;  that  the  sword  which  is  wielded  by 
the  powers  that  be,  is  to  preserve  civil  justice  and  peace  ; 
and  that  the  authority  of  the  State  is  to  be  exercised  only 


5T6  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

over  the  bodies  of  men  and  the  temporal  concerns  of  life, 
that  is,  of  the  affairs  of   this  world.     This  shuts  away  the 
State  from  all  connection  or  interference  with  things  spir-- 
itual   or   religious.     It  separates   entirely   religion   and  the 
State. 

While  doing  this  for  the  State,  it  also  clearly  defines  the 
place  of  the  church.  While  the  State  is  to  stand  entirely 
aloof  from  spiritual  and  religious  things  and  concern  itself 
only  with  the  civil  and  temporal  affairs  of  men,  the  church 
on  its  part  is  to  stand  aloof  from  the  affairs  of  the  State,  and 
is  not  to  interfere  in  the  civil  and  temporal  concerns  of  men. 
The  power  of  the  church  is  not  to  be  mingled  with  the  power 
of  the  State.  The  power  of  the  church  is  never  to  invade 
the  realm,  or  seek  to  guide  the  jurisdiction,  of  the  State. 
The  duty  of  the  clergy  is  to  minister  the  gospel  of  Christ  and 
not  the  laws  of  men.  In  dealing  with  its  membership  in  the 
exercise  of  discipline,  the  church  authorities  are  to  act  with- 
out human  power,  and  solely  by  the  word  of  God.  The 
ministry  of  the  gospel  is  with  reference  only  to  eternal  things, 
and  is  not  to  trouble  itself  with  political  administration. 

This  is  Protestantism.  This  is  Christianity.  Wherever 
these  principles  have  been  followed,  there  is  Protestantism 
exemplified  in  the  Church  and  the  State.  Wherever  these 
principles  have  not  been  followed,  there  is  the  principle  of 
the  papacy,  it  matters  not  what  the  profession  may  have 
been. 

THE    LUTHERANS    IN    GERMANY. 

In  his  later  years,  having  refused  to  walk  in  the  advanc- 
ing light,  and  so  having  less  of  the  word  of  God  and  there- 
fore less  faith,  even  Luther  swerved  from  the  genuine  Chris- 
tian and  Protestant  principle,  denied  any  right  of  toleration 
to  the  Zwinglians,  and  advocated  the  banishment  of  "  false 
teachers"  and  the  utter  rooting  out  of  the  Jews  from 
"Christian"  lands.7  At  Luther's  death  many  Protestants 
set  themselves  to  maintain  the  doctrines  stated  by  him,  and 

7  Schaff's  "  History  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Vol.  xiv,  \  11,  par.  22,  23. 


ZWINGLE  AS  A  REFORMER.  57? 

steadily  refused  to  take  a  single  advance  step.  These  thus 
became  Lutherans  rather  than  Protestants,  and  thus  was 
formed  the  Lutheran  Church.  And  though  this  church  to 
this  day  holds  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  one  of  its  chief 
symbols ;  and  though  about  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  cent- 
ury "the  Lutheran  churches  adopted  the  leading  maxim  of 
the  Arminians,  that  Christians  were  accountable  to  God 
alone  for  their  religious  sentiments,  and  that  no  individual 
could  be  justly  punished  by  the  magistrate  for  his  erroneous 
opinions,  while  he  conducted  himself  like  a  virtuous  and 
obedient  subject,  and  made  no  attempts  to  disturb  the  peace 
and  order  of  civil  society"  (Mosheim*} ;  yet  ever  since  the 
year  1817,  the  Lutheran  Church  has  been  a  part  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  of  Prussia.  And  in  the  face  of  the  declara- 
tions of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  the  emperor  of  Germany 
to-day,  as  king  of  Prussia,  is  the  supreme  pontiff  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  in  Prussia.  In  the  Scandinavian  countries 
also,  the  Lutheran  Church  is  the  State  Church. 

THE    REFORMATION    IN    SWITZERLAND. 

Zwingle,  w~ho  gave  the  cast  to  the  Reformation  in  Switz- 
erland, sanctioned,  if  he  did  not  really  create  there,  the 
union  of  Church  and  State.  His  view  was  that  the  State  is 
Christian.  "The  Reformer  deserting  the  paths  of  the  apos- 
tles, allowed  himself  to  be  led  astray  by  the  perverse  ex- 
ample of  popery."  He  himself  "  resolved  to  be  at  one  and 
the  same  time  the  man  of  the  State  and  of  the  Church,  .  .  . 
at  once  the  head  of  the  State  and  general  of  the  army  —  this 
double,  this  triple,  part  of  the  Reformer  was  the  ruin  of  the 
Reformation  and  of  himself."  For  when  war  came  on  in 
Switzerland,  Zwingle  girded  on  his  sword,  and  went  with 
the  troops  to  battle.  ' '  Zwingle  played  two  parts  at  once  — 
he  was  a  reformer  and  a  magistrate.  But  these  are  two  char- 
acters that  ought  no  more  to  be  united  than  those  of  a  min- 
ister and  of  a  soldier.  We  will  not  altogether  blame  the 

8  "  Ecclesiastical  History,"  Century  xvii,  sec.  ii,  part  il,  chap.  1,  par.  16. 


578  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

soldiers  and  the  magistrates  :  in  forming  leagues  and  draw- 
ing the  sword,  even  for  the  sake  of  religion,  they  act  accord- 
ing to  their  point  of  view,  although  it  is  not  the  same  as 
ours  ;  but  we  must  decidedly  blame  the  Christian  minister 
who  becomes  a  diplomatist  or  a  general." 

He  who  took  the  sword,  perished  by  the  sword.  In  the 
first  battle  that  was  fought  —  October  11,  A.  D.  1531  — 
twenty-five  of  the  Swiss  reform  preachers  were  slain,  the 
chief  of  whom  was  Zwingle,  who  fell  stricken  with  many 
blows.  "If  the  German  Reformer  had  been  able  to  ap- 
proach Zwingle  at  this  solemn  moment  and  pronounce 
those  oft-repeated  words,  '  Christians  fight  not  with  sword 
and  arquebuse,  but  with  sufferings  and  with  the  cross,' 
Zwingle  would  have  stretched  out  his  dying  hand  and  said, 
'  Amen.  '  r  - 


THE  REFORMATION  IN  ENGLAND. 

Although  the  Reformation  was  begun  in  England  by 
Tyndale  about  the  same  time  that  it  was  commenced  by 
Luther  in  Germany,  it  attracted  Nno  public  notice  until 
1521,  when  Henry  VIII,  as  the  doughty  champion  of  the 
papacy,  promptly  took  up  the  enforcement  of  the  pope's 
bull  ;  and  Luther's  writings  were  publicly  burnt  in  London, 
May  21.  Cardinal  Wolsey  was  master  of  ceremonies. 
"  Before,  a  priest  of  a  stately  figure  carried  a  rod,  sur- 
mounted by  a  crucifix  ;  behind  him  another,  no  less  stately, 
carried  the  archiepiscopal  cross  of  York  ;  a  nobleman,  walk- 
ing at  his  side,  carried  his  cardinal's  hat.  He  was  attended 
by  nobles,  prelates,  embassadors  of  the  pope  and  the 
emperor,  and  these  were  followed  by  a  long  train  of  mules, 
carrying  trunks  with  the  richest  and  most  splendid  coverings. 
At  London,  amidst  this  magnificent  procession,  the  writings 
of  the  poor  monk  of  Wittemberg  were  carried  to  the  flames. 

Tor  these  quotations,  under  "Zwingle,"  see  D'Aubigne's  "History  of  the 
Reformation,"  book  xvi,  chap,  iv,  par.  1;  chap,  i,  par.  7*  chap,  iv,  par.  2:  and 
chap,  viii,  par.  6  from  the  end. 


HENRY    VTII. 


HENRY   VIII  AGAINST  LUTHER. 

On  arriving  at  the  cathedral,  the  proud  priest  made  even  his 
cardinal's  hat  be  placed  upon  the  altar.  The  virtuous  bishop 
of  Rochester  took  his  station  at  the  foot  of  the  cross,  and 
there,  in  animated  tone,  inveighed  against  heresy.  The 
impious  writings  of  the  heresiarch  were  then  brought  forward, 
and  devoutly  burned  in  presence  of  an  immense  crowd. 
Such  was  the  first  news  which  England  received  of  the 
Reformation. "  —  D^Aubignt. 10 

But  Henry  was  not  content  with  this  ;  nor  even  with 
opposing  the  Reformation  in  his  own  dominions.  He  wrote 
to  the  Archduke  Palatine  of  Germany,  in  the  following 
words  :  — 

"This  fire,  which  has  been  kindled  by  Luther,  and  fanned  by  the 
arts  of  the  devil,  is  raging  everywhere.  If  Luther  does  not  repent, 
deliver  him  and  his  audacious  treatises  to  the  flames.  I  offer  you  my 
royal  co-operation,  and  even,  if  necessary,  my  life."11 

Nor  did  he  stop  here.  He  entered  the  lists  as  a  theolo- 
gian, and  wrote  against  Luther  a  book  entitled  the  "De- 
fense of  the  Seven  Sacraments  Against  Martin  Luther,  by 
the  Most  Invincible  King  of  England,  France,  and  Ireland, 
Henry,  Eighth  of  the  Name."  In  the  book  he  set  him- 
self forth  as  a  sacrifice  for  the  preservation  of  the  church, 
and  also  proclaimed  the  papal  principles,  in  the  following 
words  :  — 

"  I  will  throw  myself  before  the  church,  I  will  receive  in  my  breast  the 
poisoned  darts  of  the  enemy  who  is  assailing  her.  To  this  the  present 
state  of  affairs  calls  me.  Every  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  whatever  be  his 
age,  rank,  or  sex,  must  bestir  himself  against  the  common  enemy  of 
Christendom. 

"  Let  us  arm  ourselves  with  double  armor  —  with  heavenly  weapons, 
that  by  the  arms  of  truth  we  may  vanquish  him  who  combats  with  the  arms 
of  error.  But  let  us  also  arm  ourselves  with  terrestrial  armor,  in  order 
that,  if  he  proves  obstinate  in  his  wickedness,  the  hand  of  the  execu- 
tioner may  constrain  him  to  silence  ;  and  he  may  thus,  for  once  at  least, 
be  useful  to  the  world  by  his  exemplary  punishment."  12 


10  Id.,  book  ix,  chap,  x,  par.  9.  n  Id.,  book  xviii,  chap,  v,  par.  5, 

12  Id.,  book  ix,  chap.  x.  par.  12. 


580  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

He  denounced  Luther  as  "an  infernal  wolf,  a  venomous 
viper,  a  limb  of  the  devil,"  and  other  such  handsome 
things.  By  his  partisans  and  flatterers,  Henry's  book  was 
extolled  to  the  skies.  It  was  declared  "the  most  learned 
work  that  ever  the  sun  saw,"  and,  appropriately  enough 
indeed,  it  was  compared  with  the  works  of  St.  Augustine. 
Henry  himself  they  pronounced  a  Constantine,  a  Charle- 
magne, and  even  a  second  Solomon.  Henry  was  no  less 
pleased  in  fact  with  his  performance,  than  the  others  pre- 
tended to  be.  He  had  his  embassador  at  Rome  deliver  to 
the  pope  in  person  a  copy  of  the  book  ;  and  the  embassador, 
in  presenting  it  to  the  pope,  who  received  him  in  full  con- 
sistory, said  :  "The  king,  my  master,  assures  you  that,  after 
refuting  the  errors  of  Luther  with  his  pen,  he  is  ready  to 
combat  his  adherents  with  the  sword."13 

The  grateful  pope,  as  was  to  be  expected,  struck  even 
yet  a  higher  note  of  praise  to  Henry.  Leo  X  replied  that 
the  book  of  the  king  of  England  could  only  have  been  com- 
posed with  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  in  return  gave 
the  embassador  both  his  foot  and  his  cheek  to  be  kissed, 
saying,  "I  will  do  for  your  master's  book  as  much  as  the 
church  has  done  for  St.  Jerome  and  St.  Augustine."  To 
his  cardinals  Leo  said,  "  "We  must  honor  those  noble  cham- 
pions who  show  themselves  prepared  to  cut  off  with  the 
sword  the  rotten  members  of  Jesus  Christ.  What  title  shall 
we  give  to  the  virtuous  king  of  England  ?  "  One  suggested, 
"Protector  of  the  Roman  Church,"  another^  "Apostolic 
King ; "  as  the  final  result,  a  bull  was  issued  by  the  pope, 
proclaiming  Henry  VIII  "Defender  of  the  Faith,"  and  grant- 
ing ten  years'  indulgence  to  all  who  would  read  the  king's 
book. 

The  bull  was  promptly  sent  by  a  messenger  to  Henry, 
who  of  course  M*as  overjoyed  when  he  received  it.  A 
moment  after  Henry  received  the  bull,  the  king's  fool 
entered  the  room.  Henry's  joy  was  so  marked  that  the  fool 
asked  him  the  cause  of  it.  The  king  replied,  "The  pope 

13  Id.,  par.  17. 


LUTHER  AGAINST   THE  PAPACY.  581 

has  just  made  me  'Defender  of  the  Faith."  The  fool 
being  the  only  wise  man  in  the  whole  transaction,  replied, 
"Ho!  ho!  good  Harry,  let  you  and  me  defend  one  an- 
other ;  but  take  my  word  for  it,  let  the  faith  alone  to  defend 
itself."  Henry  decided  that  the  new  dignity  thus  bestowed 
upon  him  should  be  publicly  proclaimed.  "  Seated  upon  an 
elevated  throne,  with  the  cardinal  at  his  right  hand,  he 
caused  the  pope's  letter  to  be  read  in  public.  The  trumpets 
sounded  ;  Wolsey  said  mass  ;  the  king  and  his  court  took 
their  seats  around  a  sumptuous  table,  and  the  heralds-at- 
anns  proclaimed,  "  Ilenricus  Dei  gratia  Rex  Angliae  ef 
Franciae,  Defensor  Fidei  et  Dominus  Jliberniae ! "  — 
"Henry,  by  the  grace  of  God  king  of  England  and  France, 
defender  of  the  faith,  and  lord  of  Ireland."  " 

Thus  was  acquired  by  the  sovereign  of  England,  the 
title  and  dignity  of  "Defender  of  the  Faith,"  which  has  been 
worn  by  all  the  successors  of  Henry,  and  is  held  to-day  by 
Queen  Yictoria. 

Luther  was  not  the  man  to  keep  silence,  not  even  when 
kings  spoke.  lie  had  faced  the  emperor  ;  he  had  defied  the 
pope  ;  and  now  he  both  contemns  and  defies  Henry,  and  all 
the  rest  of  the  papal  brood  together.  Besides  meeting  and 
overthrowing  the  king's  arguments  in  detail,  his  ringing 
words  of  defiance  of  the  papacy,  and  his  faith  in  the  word  of 
God  only  and  its  power,  were  a  call  to  all  Europe  to  take 
refuge  under  the  standard  of  the  Reformation,  and  are 
worthy  forever  to  be  held  in  remembrance.  The  opening 
and  the  closing  of  his  reply  to  Henry  is  as  follows  :  — 

"  I  will  not  deal  mildly  with  the  king  of  England  ;  it  is  in  vain  (I 
know  it  is)  to  humble  myself,  to  yield,  beseech,  and  try  the  ways  of 
peace.  I  will  at  length  show  myself  more  terrible  than  the  ferocious 
beasts  who  are  constantly  butting  me  with  their  horns.  I  will  let  them 
feel  mine  ;  I  will  preach  and  irritate  Satan  until  he  wears  himself  out, 
and  falls  down  exhausted.  'If  this  heretic  retracts  not,' says  the  new 
Thomas,  Henry  VIII,  'he  must  be  burnt.'  Such  are  the  weapons  now 
employed  against  me  ;  first,  the  fury  of  stupid  asses  and  Thomastical 
swine,  and  then  the  fire.  \7ery  well !  Let  these  swine  come  for- 
14 /rf.,  book  xviii,  chap,  v,  par.  10-12. 


582  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

ward,  if  they  dare,  and  burn  me  !  Here  I  am,  waiting  for  them.  My 
wish  is,  that  my  ashes,  thrown,  after  my  death,  into  a  thousand  seas,  may 
arise,  pursue,  and  engulf  this  abominable  crew.  Living,  I  will  be  the 
enemy  of  the  papacy  ;  burnt,  I  will  be  its  destruction.  Go,  swine  of 
St.  Thomas  ;  do  what  seemeth  to  you  good.  You  shall  ever  find  Luther 
as  a  bear  in  your  way,  and  a  lion  in  your  path.  He  will  thunder  upon 
you  from  all  quarters,  and  leave  you  no  peace  until  he  has  brayed  your 
brains  of  iron,  and  ground  to  powder  your  foreheads  of  brass.  For  me, 
I  cease  not  to  cry,  'The  gospel  !  the  gospel  !  Christ !  Christ !'  while  my 
opponents  cease  not  to  reply,  '  Customs  !  customs  !  ordinances !  ordi- 
nances !  Fathers  !  Fathers  ! '  '  Let  your  faith,'  says  St.  Paul,  '  stand  not  in 
tlie  wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the  power  of  God.'  And  the  apostle,  by  this 
thunderbolt  from  heaven,  overthrows  and  scatters,  like  the  dust  before 
the  wind,  all  the  silly  crotchets  of  this  Henry.  To  all  the  sayings  of  Fa- 
thers, men,  angels,  devils,  I  oppose  not  the  antiquity  of  custom,  not  the 
multitude,  but  the  word  of  the  Eternal  Majesty,  the  gospel,  which  they 
themselves  are  constrained  to  approve.  By  it  I  hold  ;  on  it  I  rest ;  in  it 
I  glory,  triumph,  and  exult  over  papists,  Thomists,  Henrys,  and  all  the 
hellish  sty.  The  King  of  heaven  is  with  me,  and  therefore  I  fear  noth- 
ing, even  should  a  thousand  Augustines,  a  thousand  Cyprians,  and  a 
thousand  churches,  of  which  Henry  is  defender,  rise  up  against  me.  It 
is  a  small  matter  for  me  to  despise  and  lash  an  earthly  king,  who  himself 
has  not  feared,  in  his  writing,  to  blaspheme  the  King  of  heaven,  and  pro- 
fane his  holiness  by  the  most  audacious  falsehood. 

Papists !  Will  you  not  desist  from  your  vain  pursuits  ?  Do  as  you 
please,  the  result,  however,  must  be,  that  before  the  gospel  which  I, 
Martin  Luther,  have  preached,  popes,  bishops,  priests,  monks,  princes, 
devils,  death,  sin,  and  whatever  is  not  Jesus  Christ  or  in  Jesus  Christ, 
shall  fall  and  perish."15 

Soon,  however,  Henry  wanted  a  divorce  from  his  wife, 
Catherine,  that  he  might  marry  Anne  Boleyn.  The  pope, 
Clement  VII,  proposed  to  grant  him  his  wish,  and  actually 
signed  a  "decretal  by  which  he  himself  annulled  the  mar- 
riage between  Henry  and  Catherine."  He  also  "  signed  a 
valid  engagement  by  which  he  declared  beforehand  that  all 
retractation  of  these  acts  should  be  null  android" — ZPAu- 
~bign6.v>  Both  these  documents  were  committed  to  the 
legate,  Compeggio,  whom  he  was  sending  to  England  pro- 
fessedly to  conduct  the  proceedings  and  accomplish  the  fact 

15 Id.,  book  ix,  chap,  x,  par.  20-24. 

16 Id.,  book  xix,  last  chap.,  last  par.  but  one. 


HENRY  DIVORCES   THE  POPE.  583 

of  the  divorce  ;  but  at  the  same  time  gave  him  positive  com- 
mand that  he  must  n^ver  let  the  decretal  go  out  of  his  hands. 
Compeggio  departed  for  England ;  the  political  winds  sud- 
denly veered,  messengers  were  sent  with  all  speed  after  him, 
directing  him  to  delay  both  his  journey,  and  all  the  proceed- 
ings as  much  as  possible  ;  and  especially  commanding  him 
not  to  use  the  decretal,  nor  take  any  other  step  favorable  to 
the  divorce,  without  a  new  and  express  order  from  the  pope 
himself.  The  outcome  of  it  all  was  that  the  pope,  finding  it 
impracticable  under  the  circumstances  to  offend  the  emperor, 
who  was  Catherine's  nephew,  played  so  long  his  lingering 
game  with  Henry,  with  the  hope  of  holding  both  sover- 
eigns, that  Henry  grew  impatient,  and  divorced  both  Cather- 
ine and  the  pope.  This  being  accomplished,  he  proceeded 
at  once,  A.  D.  1533,  to  put  Anne  Boleyn  in  the  place  of 
Catherine,  as  queen  ;  and  himself  in  the  place  of  the  pope, 
as  head  of  the  church  in  England.  It  was  in  the  fullest 
sense  of  the  word  that  Henry  put  himself  in  the  place  of  the 
pope  in  the  realm  of  England. 

In  1534-  the  "  Act  of  Supremacy"  was  passed  by  Par- 
liament, by  which  "authority  in.  all  matters  ecclesiastical 
was  vested  solely  in  the  crown.  The  courts  spiritual  became 
as  thoroughly  the  king's  courts  as  the  temporal  courts  at 
AVestminster.  The  statute  ordered  that  the  king  '  shall  be 
taken,  accepted,  and  reputed  the  only  supreme  head  on  earth 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  shall  have  and  enjoy,  an- 
nexed and  united  to  the  imperial  crown  of  this  realm,  as 
well  the  title  and  state  thereof  as  all  the  honors,  jurisdic- 
tions, authorities,  immunities,  profits,  and  commodities  to 
the  said  •  dignity  belonging,  and  with  full  power  to  visit, 
repress,  redress,  reform,  and  amend  all  such  errors,  her- 
esies, abuses,  contempts,  and  enormities  which  by  any  man- 
ner of  spiritual  authority  or  jurisdiction  might  or  may 
lawfully  be  reformed.'" — Green.11 

The  very  pattern  of  the  Inquisition  was  established  in 
England.  At  the  close  of  1534  a  statute  was  made  which 

17  "  Larger  History  of  the  English  People,"  book  v,  chap,  iv,  par.  16. 
45 


584  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

declared  to  be  treason  "the  denial  of  any  of  the  king's 
titles,"  and  as  the  king  in  1535  assumed,  the  title,  "  On  earth 
supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England,"  anj  denial  of  his 
headship  of  the  church  was  therefore  treason  ;  and  Thomas 
Cromwell  pushed  this  principle  to  the  utmost  limit.  "Spies 
were  scattered  broadcast  over  the  land,  secret  denunciations 
poured  into  the  open  ear  of  the  minister.  The  air  was  thick 
with  tales  of  plots  and  conspiracies.  .  .  .  The  confessional 
had  no  secrets  from  Cromwell.  Men's  talk  with  their  closest 
friends  found  its  way  to  his  ear.  Words  idly  spoken,  the 
murmurs  of  a  petulant  abbot,  the  ravings  of  a  moonstruck 
nun,  were,  as  the  nobles  cried  passionately  at  his  fall,  tor- 
tured into  treason.  The  only  chance  of  safety  lay  in  silence. 
But  even  the  refuge  of  silence  was  closed  by  a  law  more 
infamous  than  any  that  has  ever  blotted  the  statute-book  of 
England.  Not  only  was  thought  made  treason,  but  men 
were  forced  to  reveal  their  thoughts  on  pain  of  their  very 
silence  being  punished  with  the  penalties  of  treason.  All 
trust  in  the  older  bulwarks  of  liberty  was  destroyed  by  a 
policy  as  daring  as  it  was  unscrupulous.  The  noblest  institu- 
tions were  degraded  into  instruments  of  terror."  -  Green.1* 
That  which  was  now  the  Church  of  England  was  simply 
that  which  before  was  the  Catholic  Church  in  England. 
"In  form  nothing  had  been  changed.  The  outer  Constitu- 
tion of  the  church  remained  entirely  unaltered."  In  faith, 
likewise,  nothing  had  been  changed  in  fact,  except  in  the 
mere  change  of  the  personages  who  assumed  the  prerogative 
of  dispensers  of  it.  Henry,  as  both  king  and  pope,  was 
now  the  supreme  head  of  the  church.  "From  the  primate 
to  the  meanest  deacon,  every  minister  of  it  derived  from  him 
his  sole  right  to  exercise  spiritual  powers.  The  voice  of  its 
preachers  was  the  echo  of  his  will.  He  alone  could  define 
orthodoxy  or  declare  heresy.  The  forms  of  its  worship  and 
belief  were  changed  and  rechanged  at  the  royal  caprice." 
For  as  early  as  1532,  Henry  had  laid  down  the  proposition 
that  "  the  king's  majesty  hath  as  well  the  care  of  the  souls 

18  Id.,  par.  21,  3£. 


RELIGIOUS  RIGHTS  IN  ENGLAND.  585 

of  his  subjects  as  their  bodies  ;  and  may  by  the  law  of  God 
by  his  Parliament  make  laws  touching  and  concerning  as 
well  the  one  as  the  other."  -  Green.™ 

Such  was  the  "Reformation"  accomplished  by  "Henry, 
Eighth  of  the  Name,"  so  far  as  in  him  and  his  intention  lay. 
But  to  be  divorced  from  the  pope  of  Rome  was  a  great  thing 
for  England.  And  as  Henry  had  set  the  example  of  revolt 
from  papal  rule  when  exercised  from  the  papal  throne,  the 
English  people  were  not  slow  in  following  the  example  thus 
set,  and  revolting  from  the  same  rule  when  exercised  from 
the  English  throne.  It  began  even  in  Henry's  reign,  in  the 
face  of -all  the  terrors  of  a  rule  "which  may  be  best  de- 
scribed by  saying  that  it  was  despotism  itself  personified.  "- 
Macanday™  During  the  regency  of  Edward  YI  and  under 
the  guidance  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  advance  steps  were 
taken  even  by  the  Church  of  England  itself  —  the  use  of 
images,  of  the  crucifix,  of  incense,  tapers,  and  holy  water  ; 
the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  the  worship  of  saints,  auricular 
confession,  the  service  in  Latin,  and  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy,  were  abolished.  During  the  Catholic  reaction  under 
Mary,  the  spirit  of  revolt  was  confirmed  ;  and  under  Eliza- 
beth, when  the  polity  of  the  Church  of  England  became 
fixed,  and  thenceforward,  it  constantly,  and  at  times  almost 
universally,  prevailed. 

In  short,  the  example  set  by  Henry  has  been  so  well  and 
so  persistently  followed  through  the  ages  that  have  since 
passed,  that,  although  the  Church  of  England  still  subsists, 
and,  although  the  sovereign  of  England  still  remains  the  head 
of  the  Church  of  England  and  Defender  of  the  Faith,  both  the 
office  and  the  title  are  of  so  flexible  a  character  that  they 
easily  adapt  themselves  to  the  headship  and  defense  of  the 
faith  of  Episcopalianism  in  England  and  of  Presbyterianism 
in  Scotland.  And  yet  even  more  and  far  better  than  this, 
the  present  sovereign  of  England,  Queen  Victoria,  has  dis- 
tinctly renounced  the  claim  of  right  to  rule  in  matters  of 

19  Id.,  book  vi,  chap,  i,  parr  5,  1,  and  book  v,  chap,  iv,  par.  13. 

20  Essays,  "Hallam,"  par.  27. 


586  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

faith.     In  1859  Her  Majesty  issued  a  royal  proclamation  to 
her  subjects  in  India,  in  which  she  said  these  words  :  — 

"Firmly  relying,  ourselves,  on  the  truth  of  Christianity,  and  ac- 
knowledging with  gratitude  the  solace  of  religion,  we  disclaim  alike  the 
right  and  the  desire  to  impose  our  convictions  on  any  of  our  subjects. 
We  declare  it  to  be  our  royal  will  and  pleasure  that  none  be  in  any  wise 
favored,  none  molested  or  disquieted,  by  reason  of  their  religious  faith 
or  observances,  but  that  all  shall  alike  enjoy  the  equal  and  impartial  pro- 
tection of  the  law  ;  and  we  do  strictly  charge  and  enjoin  all  those  who 
may  be  in  authority  under  us  that  they  abstain  from  all  interference 
with  the  religious  belief  or  worship  of  any  of  our  subjects,  on  pain  of 
our  highest  displeasure. 

"  And  it  is  our  further  will  that,  so  far  as  may  be,  our  subjects,  of 
whatever  race  or  creed,  be  freely  and  impartially  admitted  to  offices  in 
our  service,  the  duties  of  which  they  maybe  qualified  by  their  education, 
ability,  and  integrity  to  discharge." 

CALVINISM    IN    GENEVA. 

The  views  of  Calvin  on  the  subject  of  Church  and  State, 
were  as  thoroughly  theocratic  as  the  papal  system  itself. 
Augustine  was  his  master  and  model  throughout.  When  at 
the  age  of  twenty-eight,  at  the  urgent  call  of  Farel,  Calvin 
settled  in  Geneva,  he  drew  up  a  condensed  statement  of 
Christian  doctrine,  in  fact  a  synopsis  of  his  "Institutes," 
consisting  of  twenty-one  articles  which  all  the  citizens  were 
called  up  in  bunches  of  ten  each,  "  To  profess  and  swear  to, 
as  the  confession  of  their  faith."  This  method  of  making  a 
Calvinistic  city  was  gone  through  with,  Calvin  himself  said, 
'•with  much  satisfaction."  This  oath  and  confession  of 
faith  were  made  as  citizens,  not  particularly  as  church  mem- 
bers. They  were  not  asked  whether  they  were  converted  ; 
they  were  not  required  to  be  church  members  ;  but  simply 
as  men  and  citizens,  were  required  to  take  the  oath  and 
accept  this  as  the  confession  of  their  faith. 

In  fact,  the  oath  of  allegiance  as  a  citizen,  and  the  con- 
fession of  fa;th  as  a  Christian,  were  identical.  This  was  at 
once  to  make  the  Church  and  the  State  one  and  the  same  thing 


JOHN   CALVIN. 


THE   CALVINISTIC  THEOCRACY.  587 

with  the  Church  above  the  State.  Yea,  more  than  this,  it  was 
wholly  to  swallow  up  the  civil  in  the  ecclesiastical  power  ; 
for  the  preachers  were  supreme.  It  was  but  another 
man-made  theocracy,  after  the  model  of  the  papacy.  In- 
deed, according  to  Calvin's  "Institutes,"  the  very  reason  of 
existence  of  the  State,  is  only  as  the  support  and  the  servant 
of  the  church  ;  and  accordingly,  when  the  magistrate  inflicts 
punishment,  he  is  to  be  regarded  as  executing  the  judgment 
of  God.  "  What  we  see  on  the  banks  of  the  Leman  is  a 
theocracy  ;  Jehovah  was  its  head,  the  Bible  was  the  supreme 
code,  and  the  government  exercised  a  presiding  and  paternal 
guardianship  over  all  interests  and  causes,  civil  and  spirit- 
ual."— Wylie*1 

Serious  difficulty,  however,  arose,  when  it  came  to  en- 
forcing the  strictness  of  scriptural  morality,  and  the  Calvin- 
istic  restrictions  regarding  the  dress  and  manner  of  life  of 
the  citizens  which  the  two  preachers  had  adopted.22  All  who 
had  been  made  Christian  citizens  by  the  machine  method 
before  mentioned,  resented  it,  and  desired  that  the  strictness 
of  discipline  should  be  modified.  This  the  preachers  looked 
upon  as  an  attempt  of  the  civil  power  to  dictate  in  spiritual 
matters,  and  they  refused  to  yield  in  the  least  degree.  The 
people  insisted,  and  the  preachers  stood  firm.  The  dissen- 
sion soon  grew  so  violent  that  the  preachers  refused  to  adminis- 
ter the  sacraments  to  the  people  ;  then  the  people  rose  up 
and  banished  them  from  the  city,  A.  D.  1539. 

Calvin  went  to  Strasburg,  where  he  remained  two  years, 
during  which  time  much  disorder  prevailed  in  Geneva,  and 
the  friends  of  Calvin  insisted  all  the  time  that  if  only  he 
were  recalled,  order  could  be  restored.  In  1541  the  decree 
of  banishment  was  revoked,  and  at  "the  earnest  entreaties 


21 "  History  of  Protestantism,"  book  xiv,  chap,  x,  last  par.  but  one. 

22  Id.  Everybody  had  to  be  at  home  by  nine  o'clock  at  night  ;  and  hotel 
keepers  were  required  to  see  that  this  rule  was  observed  by  their  guests.  Rules 
were  made  "restraining  excess  in  dress,  and  profusion  at  meals;  "  and  every- 
body was  required  to  attend  both  preaching  and  other  religious  serrices. 


588  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

of  the  Genevese,  Calvin  returned."  He  was  no  less  de- 
termined than  before  to  have  his  own  way,  and  to  make  his 
will  absolute  ;  and  the  circumstances  under  which  he  re- 
turned, paved  the  way  for  him  to  execute  his  will  as  he  was 
not  suffered  to  do  before.  "He  entered  upon  his  work 
with  a  firm  determination  to  carry  out  those  reforms  which 
he  had  originally  purposed,  and  to  set  up  in  all  its  integrity 
that  form  of  church  policy  which  he  had  carefully  matured 
during  his  residence  at  Strasburg."  The  town  was  divided 
into  parishes,  with  an  elder  or  some  one  appointed  by  the 
council  of  elders,  in  charge  of  each  parish,  to  see  that  disci- 
pline was  observed. 

"  His  system  of  church  polity  was  essentially  theocratic  ; 
it  assumed  that  every  member  of  the  State  was  also  under 
the  discipline  of  the  church  ;  and  he  asserted  that  the  right 
of  exercising  this  discipline  was  vested  exclusively  in  the 
consistory,  or  l)ody  of  preachers  and  elders.  His  attempts  to 
carry  out  these  views  brought  him  into  collision  both  with 
the  authorities  and  with  the  populace,  the  latter  being  en- 
raged at  the  restraints  imposed  upon  the  disorderly  by  the 
exercise  of  church  discipline,  and  the  former  being  inclined 
to  retain  in  their  own  hands  a  portion  of  that  power  in 
things  spiritual,  which  Calvin  was  bent  on  placing  exclu- 
sively in  the  hands  of  the  church  rulers.  His  dauntless 
courage,  his  perseverance,  and  his  earnestness  at  length  pre- 
vailed, and  he  had  the  satisfaction,  before  he  died,  of  seeing 
his  favorite  system  of  church  polity  firmly  established,  not 
only  at  Geneva,  but  in  other  parts  of  Switzerland,  and  of 
knowing  that  it  had  been  adopted  substantially  by  the  Re- 
formers in  France  and  Scotland.  ]Sor  was  it  only  in  relig- 
ious matters  that  Calvin  busied  himself  ;  ^nothing  was  indif- 
ferent to  him  that  concerned  the  welfare  and  good  order  of 
the  State  or  the  advantage  of  its  citizens.  His  work,  as  has 
been  justly  said,  'embraced  everything;'  he  was  consulted 
on  every  affair,  great  and  small,  that  came  before  the  coun- 
cil,—  on  questions  of  law,  policy,  economy,  trade,  and 


CALVIN'S  DESPOTISM.  589 

manufactures,  no  less  than  011  questions  of  doctrine  and 
church  polity ."-  —  Encyclopedia  Britannica.** 

It  is  plain  that  when  every  member  of  the  State  was  subject 
to  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  and  when  this  discipline  was 
exercised  exclusively  by  the  body  of  preachers  and  elders 
with  Calvin  at  the  head  of  that  body,  his  power  was  practi- 
cally unlimited.  And  by  this  it  is  further  evident  that  the 
system  there  made  and  established  by  Calvin,  was  but  the 
papal  system  over  again,  with  Calvin  as  pope.21  And  the 
use  which  he  made  of  the  power  with  which  he  was  thus 
clothed,  shows  that  he  was  as  ready  to  exert  the  authority, 
as  he  was  to  sit  in  the  place,  of  a  pope. 

'The  people  having  just  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  the  pope  of 
Rome,  were  not  all  ready  to  bear  with  meekness  the  yoke  of 
the  pope  of  Geneva.  One  of  the  first  to  speak  out,  was  Gruet, 
who  attacked  him  "vigorously  on  his  supremacy,  called  him 
"  bishop  of  Asculurn,"  and  ''  the  new  pope."  Among  other 
points  of  dissent,  Gruet  denied  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 
He  may  have  been  an  infidel,  but  it  is  not  certain  ;  at  any 
rate,  he  was  brought  before  the  council,  by  which  he  was 
condemned  and  punished  with  death.  Another  who  dis- 
sented was  Castalio,  master  of  the  public  schools  of  Geneva. 
He  attacked  Calvin's  doctrine  of  unconditional  predestina- 
tion. He  was  deposed  from  his  office  and  banished.  An- 
other was  Jerome  Bolsec,  a  monk  who  had  been  converted 
to  Protestantism.  He,  too,  attacked  the  doctrine  of  absolute 
decrees.  He  was  thrown  into  prison,  and  after  a  two  days' 
debate  with  Calvin  before  the  council,  was  banished. 

Out  of  this  grew  still  another.  Jacques  de  Bourgogne, 
a  lineal  descendant  of  the  dukes  of  Burgundy,  and  an  inti- 
mate friend  and  patron  of  Calvin,  had  settled  at  Geneva 
solely  to  have  the  pleasure  of  his  company.  Bourgogne  had 

23 Article  "Calvin."  It  was  written  by  W.  Lindsay  Alexander,  D.  D.,  one 
of  the  Bible  revisers,  and  is  clearly  favorable  to  him. 

24  Hallam  describes  him  as  "  a  sort  of  prophet-king,"  in  "  Constitutional 
History,"  chap,  iv,  par.  13,  note. 


590  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

employed  Bolsec  as  his  physician,  and  when  Bolsec  became 
involved  in  his  difficulty  with  Calvin,  Bourgogne  came  to 
his  support,  and  tried  to  prevent  his  ruin.  This  so  incensed 
Calvin  that  he  turned  his  attention  to  the  nobleman,  who 
was  obliged  to  leave  Geneva,  lest  a  worse  thing  should 
befall  him. 

Another,  and  the  most  notable  of  all  the  victims  of 
Calvin's  theocracy,  was  Servetus,  who  had  opposed  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  also  infant  baptism  ; 
and  had  published  a  book  entitled  "  Christianity  Restored," 
in  which  he  declared  his  sentiments.  At  the  instance  and 
by  the  aid  of  Calvin,  he  had  been  prosecuted  by  the  papal 
Inquisition,  and  condemned  to  death  for  blasphemy  and 
heresy,  but  he  escaped  from  their  prison  in  Dauphine,  in 
France,  and  in  making  his  way  to  Italy,  passed  through 
Geneva,  and  there  remained  a  short  time.  He  was  just 
about  to  start  for  Zurich,  when  at  the  instigation  of  Calvin, 
he  "was  seized,  and  out  of  the  book  before  mentioned,  was 
accused  of  blasphemy.  The  result,  as  everybody  knows, 
was  that  he  was  burned  to  death.  The  followers  of  Serve- 
tus were  banished  from  Geneva. 

Calvin's  system  of  government  was  not  confined  to 
Geneva,  however,  nor  did  his  idea  die  with  him.  It  occu- 
pies almost  as  large  a  place  in  the  subsequent  history  as 
does  the  papacy  itself,  of  which  throughout  it  is  so  close  a 
counterpart.  He  himself  tried  during  the  reign  of  Edward 
YI  to  have  it  adopted  in  England.  "  He  urged  Cranmer  to 
call  together  pious  and  rational  men,  educated  in  the  school 
of  God,  to  meet  and  agree  upon  one  uniform  confession  of 
doctrine  according  to  the  rule  of  Scripture,"  declaring: 
"As  for  me,  if  I  can  be  made  use  of,  I  will  sail  through 
ten  seas  to  bring  it  about. ^--  Bancroft.^ 


25  "  History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "  Prelates  and  Puritans,"  par.  11.  It 
is  not  without  reason  that,  by  one  of  his  admirers,  Calvin  has  been  compared  with 
Innocent  III. —  Wylle's  "  History  of  Protestantism,"  book  xiv,  end  of  chap,  xx.lv. 


&ELIGIOUS  DESPOTISM  IN  SCOTLAND.  591 

All  his  personal  effort  in  this  direction  failed,  however. 
He  died  May  27,  A.  D.  1564. 

CALVINISM    IN    SCOTLAND. 

It  was  stated  above  that  before  his  death  Calvin  had  the 
satisfaction,  of  knowing  that  his  system  of  church  polity  had 
been  adopted  in  Scotland.  No  doubt  this  furnished  him 
much  satisfaction  indeed.  But  if  he  could  only  have  lived 
to  see  the  time  when  that  system  was  being  worked  in  Scot- 
land according  to  its  perfect  ideal,  we  may  well  believe 
that  he  would  have  fairly  wept  in  the  fullness  of  his  un- 
speakable joy. 

From  A.  D.  1638  to  1662,  under  the  Covenanters,  the 
Calvinistic  system  was  supreme  in  Scotland;  and  "the 
arrogance  of  the  ministers'  pretensions  and  the  readiness 
with  which  these  pretensions  were  granted  ;  the  appalling 
conceptions  of  the  Deity  which  were  inculcated,  'and  the 
absence  of  all  contrary  expression  of  opinion  ;  the  intrusions 
on  the  domain  of  the  magistrate  ;  the  vexatious  interference 
in  every  detail  of  family  and  commercial  life,  and  the 
patience  with  which  it  was  borne,  are  to  an  English  reader 
alike  amazing.  'We  acknowledge,'  said  they,  'that  accord- 
ing to  the  latitude  of  the  word  of  God  (which  is  our  theame), 
we  are  allowed  to  treate  in  an  ecclesiastical  way  of  greatest 
and  smallest,  from  the  king's  throne  that  should  be  estab- 
lished in  righteousness,  to  the  merchant's  balance  that 
should  be  used  in  faithfulness.'  The  liberality  of  the  inter- 
pretation given  to  this  can  only  be  judged  of  after  minute 
reading." —  Encyclopedia  Britannica™ 

In  fact  it  was  "one  of  the  most  detestable  tyrannies  ever 
seen  on  the  earth.  When  the  Scotch  Kirk  was  at  the  height 
of  its  power,  we  may  search  history  in  vain  for  any  institu- 
tion which  can  compete  with  it,  except  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion. Between  these  two,  there  is  a  close  arid  intimate 

26  Article  "  Presbyterianism,"  par.  32. 


592  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

analogy.  Both  were  intolerant,  both  were  cruel,  both  made 
war  upon  the  finest  parts  of  human  nature,  and  both  de- 
stroyed every  vestige  of  religious  freedom."-  —  Buckle.*1 

PURITANISM    AND    THE    NEW    ENGLAND    THEOCRACY. 

After  Scotland,  it  was  in  Puritan  New  England  that  the 
Calvinistic  system  of  government  most  nearly  reached  its 
ideal. 

The  rise  of  the  Puritans  was  on  this  wise  :  To  escape  the 
persecutions  by  Mary,  in  her  attempt  to  restore  Catholicism 
as  the  religion  of  England,  many  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  fled  to  Germany.  The  worship  of  these  while  in 
exile  was  conducted  by  some  with  the  rites  of  the  Church 
of  England  as  established  under  Edward  VI,  while  others 
adopted  the  Swiss  or  Calvinistic  form  of  worship.  This 
caused  a  division,  and  much  contention  between  them.  "  The 
chief  scene  of  these  disturbances  was  Frankfort."  John  Knox 
took  the  leadership  of  those  who  were  inclined  to  Calvinism, 
while  Cox,  who  afterward  became  bishop  of  Ely,  was  the  chief 
of  those  who  defended  the  forms  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Those  who  maintained  the  English  form  of  worship  were 
called  Conformists,  and  those  who  advocated  Calvinistic 
forms,  were  called  2f on- Conformists.  The  contentions 
finally  grew  so  bitter  that  the  Conformists  drove  the  Non- 
Conformists  out  of  the  city. 

At  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  November,  1558,  the  exiles 
returned  to  England  carrying  their  differences  with  them. 
There  the  Non-Conformists  acquired  the  nick-name  of  "Puri- 
tans." "A  Puritan,  therefore,  was  a  man  of  severe  morals, 
a  Calvinist  in  doctrine,  and  a  Non-Conformist  to  the  cere- 
monies and  discipline  of  the  Church  [of  England],  though 


27  "  History  of  Civilization,"  Vol.  il,  chap,  v,  last  par.  To  this  "famous 
chapter  "  the  reader  is  confidently  referred  as  the  best  and  most  fruitful  result  of 
that  "  minute  reading  "  which  is  above  said  to  be  requisite  to  enable  a  person  to 
judge  concerning  the  system. 


THE  RISE   OF   THE  PURITANS.  593 

they  did  not  totally  separate  from  it."  -  Neal™  Yet  more 
than  this  :  they  were  not  only  not  separate  from  the  Church 
of  England,  but  it  was  not  the  purpose  of  the  Puritans  to 
separate  from  either  the  church,  or  the  government,  of  En- 
gland. It  was  their  set  purpose  to  remain  in,  and  a  part  of, 
both,  to  "reform"  both,  and  create  and  establish  instead  a 
Puritan  Church  of  England,  and  a  Puritan  government  of 
England. 

The  controversy,  as  already  stated,  turned  upon  the 
forms  of  worship  —  whether  the  clergy  shouftl  wear  vest- 
ments, whether  the  church  should  be  governed  by  bishops, 
about  cathedral  churches,  and  the  archdeacons,  deans, 
canons,  and  other  officials  of  the  same  ;  about  festivals  and 
holy-days ;  the  sign  of  the  cross,  god-fathers,  god-mothers, 
etc.  The  Conformists  held  firmly  to  the  form  of  worship  as 
established  under  Edward  VI ;  the  Puritans  insisted  on  go- 
ing the  full  length  in  renouncing  all  the  remaining  forms 
and  ceremonies.  The  queen  was  not  in  favor  of  adopting 
even  the  system  established  under  Edward,  but  inclined  yet 
more  toward  the  papal  system.  Under  the  circumstances, 
she  rather  connived  at  the  efforts  of  the  Puritan  party  until 
she  had  made  herself  secure  on  the  throne.  In  addition  to 
this,  many  seeing  the  queen  herself  neglecting  the  forms 
enjoined  by  statute,  did  the  same  thing.  The  result  was 
that  the  Puritan  principles  so  grew  in  favor  that  in  the  con- 
vocation of  1502,  when  a  motion  was  made  to  abolish  most 
of  the  usages  in  dispute,  it  was  lost  by  only  a  single  vote,  the 
vote  standing  fifty-eight  for  the  motion  and  fifty-nine 
against  it.29 

As  Elizabeth  saw  that  the  Puritan  party  was  rapidly 
growing,  she  thought  to  check  it  by  enforcing  uniformity 
according  to  the  established  usage.  In  this  she  was  zeal- 
ously supported,  if  not  rather  led,  by  the  archbishop  of 
Canterbury.  This  attempt  at  coercion  — 1567 — caused  the 

28  "History  of  the  Puritans,"  preface,  par.  6. 

'"J  Hallam's  "Constitutional  History,"  chap,  iv,  par.  5. 


594  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

Puritans  to  add  to  their  objections  to  caps,  surplices,  tippets, 
etc.,  a  strong  dislike  for  the  whole  system  of  episcopacy, 
and  a  stronger  determination  to  substitute  for  it  the  Presby- 
terian form  of  ecclesiastical  polity.  And  as  "it  is  manifest 
that  the  obstinacy  of  bold  and  sincere  men  is  not  to  be 
quelled  by  any  punishments  that  do  not  exterminate  them, 
and  that  they  were  not  likely  to  entertain  a  less  conceit  of 
their  own  reason  when  they  found  no  arguments  so  much 
relied  on  to  refute  it  as  that  of  force"  (IZallam30),  the  inev- 
itable consequence  was  that  the  efforts  to  enforce  uniformity 
only  caused  non-conformity  to  grow  more  determined  and 
more  prevalent. 

The  Puritans  had  now  grown  into  a  powerful  party, 
and,  owing  to  the  difficulties  of  her  position,  Elizabeth, 
whose  interest  in  any  matter  of  religion  — unless  that  perhaps 
of  the  papal  —  was  more  political  than  anything  else,  might 
have  been  even  yet  brought  to  assent  to  some  of  their 
demands  if  the  Puritans  could  have  been  content  with  any- 
thing like  moderation.  But  they  now  made  such  extrav- 
agant demands,  and  asserted  such  extreme  doctrines,  that 
it  became  at  once  apparent  that  they  would  be  content  with 
nothing  less  than  the  utter  subversion  of  the  State,  and  the 
establishment  in  England  of  the  system  by  which  Calvin  had 
ruled  Geneva. 

About  1570  this  movement  took  definite  shape ;  and 
among  the  leaders  in  the  movement,  ' '  Thomas  Cartwright 
was  the  chief.  He  had  studied  at  Geneva  ;  he  returned  with 
a  fanatical  faith  in  Calvinism,  and  in  the  system  of  church 
government  which  Calvin  had  devised  ;  and  as  Margaret 
professor  of  divinity  at  Cambridge,  he  used  to  the  full  the 
opportunities  which  his  chair  gave  him  of  propagating  his 
opinions.  No  leader  of  a  religious  party  ever  deserved  less 
of  after  sympathy.  Cartwright  was  unquestionably  learned 
and  devout,  but  his  bigotry  was  that  of  a  mediaeval  in- 
quistor.  The  relics  of  the  old  ritual,  the  cross  in  baptism, 

30 /d.,  par.  3  from  the  end. 


PURITAN  DESIGNS   UPON  ENGLAND.  595 

the  surplice,  the  giving  of  a  ring  in  marriage,  were  to  him 
not  merely  distasteful,  as  they  were  to  the  Puritans  at  large  ; 
they  were  idolatrous,  and  the  mark  of  the  beast. 

"  His  declamation  against  ceremonies  and  superstition, 
however,  had  little  weight  with  Elizabeth  or  her  primates  ; 
what  scared  them  was  his  most  reckless  advocacy  of  a 
scheme  of  ecclesiastical  government  which  placed  the  State 
beneath  the  feet  of  the  Church.  The  absolute  rule  of  bish- 
ops, indeed,  Cartwright  denounced  as  begotten  of  the  devil, 
but  the  absolute  rule  of  presbyters  he  held  to  be  established 
by  the  word  of  God.  For  the  church  modeled  after  the 
fashion  of  Geneva  he  claimed  an  authority  which  surpassed 
the  wildest  dreams  of  the  masters  of  the  Vatican.  All 
spiritual  authority  and  jurisdiction,  the  decreeing  of  doc- 
trine, the  ordering  of  ceremonies,  lay  wholly  in  the  hands 
of  the  ministers  of  the  church.  To  them  belonged  the 
supervision  of  public  morals.  In  an  ordered  arrangement  of 
classes  and  synods,  these  presbyters  were  to  govern  their 
flocks,  to  regulate  their  own  order,  to  decide  in  matters  of 
faith,  to  administer  'discipline.'  Their  weapon  was  excom- 
munication, and  they  were  responsible  for  its  use  to  none 
but  Christ."—  Green.31 

The  actual  relation  which  the  State  was  to  bear  toward 
the  Church,  the  magistrates  toward  the  ecclesiastics,  was  set 
forth  as  follows,  in  a  "Second  Admonition  to  Parliament," 
-1572  —  by  "the  legislator"  of  the  proposed  Puritan  re- 
public :  — 

"It  must  be  remembered  that  civil  magistrates  must  govern' the 
church  according  to  the  rules  of  God  prescribed  in  his  word,  and  that  as 
they  are  nurses,  so  they  be  servants  uuto  the  church  ;  and  as  they  rule 
in  the  church,  so  they  must  remember  to  submit  themselves  unto  the 
church,  to  submit  their  scepters,  to  throw  down  their  crowns  before 
the  church,  yea,  as  the  prophet  speaketh,  to  lick  the  dust  off  the  feet  of 
the  church." —  Cartwright.^ 

31 "  Larger  History  of  England,"  book  vi,   chap,  v,  par.  31. 

32 Quoted  by  Hallam,  "Constitutional  History,"  chap,  iv,  par.  13. 


596  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

"The  province  of  the  civil  ruler  in  such  a  system  of  re- 
ligion as  this,  was  simply  to  carry  out  the  decisions  of  the 
presbyters,  '  to  see  their  decrees  executed,  and  to  punish 
the  contemners  of  them.'  Nor  was  this  work  of  the  civil 
power  likely  to  be  light  work.  The  spirit  of  Calvinistic 
Presbyterianism  excluded  all  toleration  of  practice  or  belief. 
Not  only  was  the  rule  of  ministers  to  be  established  as  the  legal 
form  of  church  government,  but  all  other  forms,  Episcopa- 
lian or  Separatist,  were  to  be  ruthlessly  put  down.  For  heresy 
there  was  the  punishment  of  death.  Never  had  the  doctrine 
of  persecution  been  urged  with  such  a  blind  and  reckless 
ferocity.  '  I  deny, '  wrote  Cartwright,  '  that  upon  repent- 
ance there  ought  to  follow  any  pardon  of  death.  .  .  .  Here- 
tics ought  to  be  put  to  death  now.  If  this  be  bloody  and  ex- 
treme, I  am  content  to  be  so  counted  with  the  Holy  Ghost ! ' 

"The  violence  of  language  such  as  this  was  as  unlikely 
as  the  dogmatism  of  his  theological  teaching,  to  commend 
Cartwright's  opinions  to  the  mass  of  Englishmen.  Popular 
as  the  Presbyterian  system  became  in  Scotland,  it  never 
took  any  popular  hold  on  England.  It  remained  to  the  last 
a  clerical,  rather  than  a  national,  creed  ;  and  even  in  the 
moment  of  its  seeming  triumph  under  the  commonwealth, 
it  was  rejected  by  every  part  of  England  save  London  and 
Lancashire.33  But  the  bold  challenge  which  Cartwright's 


33  It  was  for  good  cause  that  it  was  so  rejected  ;  for  even  before  the  death 
of  Charles  I,  the  Presbyterian  Parliament  had  dealt  "  the  fiercest  blow  at  religious 
freedom  which  it  had  ever  received."  "An  'Ordinance  for  the  Suppression  of 
Blasphemies  and  Heresies,'  which  Vane  and  Cromwell  had  long  held  at  bay,  was 
passed  by  triumphant  majorities.  Any  man,  ran  this  terrible  statute,  denying 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  or  of  the  divinity  of  Christ,  or  that  the  books  of 
Scripture  are  the  'word  of  God,'  or  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  or  a  future  day 
of  judgment,  and  refusing  on  trial  to  abjure  his  heresy,  '  shall  suffer  the  pain  of 
death.'  Any  man  declaring  (among  a  long  list  of  other  errors)  'that  man  by 
nature  hath  free  will  to  turn  to  God,'  that  there  is  a  purgatory,  that  images  are 
lawful,  that  infant  baptism  is  unlawful  ;  any  one  denying  the  obligation  of 
observing  the  Lord's  day,  or  asserting  '  that  the  church  government  by  presby. 
tery  is  anti-Christian  or  unlawful,'  shall,  on  refusal  to  renounce  his  errors,  '  be 
commanded  to  prison.'" — Green's  "  Larger  History  of  England,"  book  vii,  chap, 
f,  par.  U. 


ELIZABETH  PERSECUTES   TUB  PURITANS.         597 

party  delivered  to  the  government  in  1572,  in  an  'Admoni- 
tion to  the  Parliament,'  which  denounced  the  government 
of  bishops  as  contrary  to  the  word  of  God,  and  demanded 
the  establishment  in  its  place  of  government  by  presbyters, 
raised  a  panic  among  English  statesmen  and  prelates, 
which  cut  off  all  hopes  of  a  quiet  treatment  of  the  merely 
ceremonial  questions  which  really  troubled  the  consciences 
of  the  more  advanced  Protestants.  The  natural  progress  of 
opinion  abruptly  ceased,  and  the  moderate  thinkers  who  had 
pressed  for  a  change  in  ritual  which  would  have  satisfied  the 
zeal  of  the  Reformers,  withdrew  from  union  with  a  party 
which  revived  the  worst  pretensions  of  the  papacy." — 
Green.341 

From  this  time  forward,  Elizabeth,  her  most  active  agency 
still  being  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  his  subjects, 
exerted  all  her  power  to  crush  the  Puritans.  And  though 
the  persecution  was  cruel,  they  bore  it  all  with  patience  ; 
first,  because  every  effort  that  was  made  to  crush  them  only 
multiplied  their  fame  and  influence  a  hundred-fold,  and, 
second,  because  they  lived  in  strong  hope  that  better  days, 
if  not  their  actual  triumph,  would  come  when  Elizabeth  was 
gone.  And  as  Elizabeth  steadily  refused  to  marry,  and 
thus  cut  off  every  possibility  of  heirship  to  the  throne 
through  her,  the  hopes  of  the  Puritans  strengthened  as  her 
age  increased  ;  because  James  of  Scotland  was  next  in  the 
line  of  succession,  and  was  not  Presbyterianism  established 
in  Scotland  ?  And  had  not  James  in  1590,  with  his  Scottish 
bonnet  off  and  his  hands  raised  to  heaven  declared  :  — 

"  I  praise  God  that  I  was  born  in  the  time  of  the  light  of  the  gospel, 
and  in  such  a  place  as  to  be  king  of  such  a  church,  the  sincerest 
[purest]  kirk  in  the  world.  The  church  of  Geneva  keep  Pasche  and 
Yule  [Easter  and  Christmas]  ;  what  have  they  for  them  ?  They  have 
no  institution.  As  for  our  neighbor  Kirk  of  England,  their  services  are 
an  evil-said  mass  in  English  ;  they  want  nothing  of  the  mass  but  the  lift- 
ings. I  charge  you,  my  good  ministers,  doctors,  elders,  nobles,  gentle- 
men, and  barons,  to  stand  to  your  purity,  and  to  exhort  the  people  to  do 

45  **  Id.,  book  vi,  chap,  v,  par.  81. 


598  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

the  same  ;  and  I,  forsooth,  as  long  as  I  brook  my  life,  shall  maintain 
the  same"  ?35 

And  had  lie  not  in  1591,  written  a  letter  to  Elizabeth  re- 
questing her  to  ' '  show  favor  to  Mr.  Cartwright  and  his 
brethren,  because  of  their  great  learning  and  faithful  travels 
in  the  gospel r  ?  Was  not  James  therefore  a  good  Presby- 
terian ?  And  would  he  not  surely  put  the  Puritans  in  their 
long-coveted  position  in  England  ? 

Elizabeth  died  March  2-t,  1603,  and  was  at  once  suc- 
ceeded by  James.  Before  he  left  Scotland  for  London  to  be 
crowned  king  of  England,  he  gave  public  thanks  to  God  in 
the  church  of  Edinburgh,  that  he  was  leaving  "both  kirk 
and  kingdom  in  that  state  which  he  intended  not  to  alter  any 
ways,  his  subjects  living  in  peace."-  —  Neal.™ 

This,  however,  as  well  as  the  speech  before  quoted,  was 
but  a  piece  of  that  "kingcraft"  upon  which  James  prided 
himself.  He  had  been  brought  up  under  Calvinistic  disci- 
pline in  Scotland,  and  had  enough  of  it  ;  and  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  he  was  only  too  glad  of  the  opportunity  to  break  loose 
from  all  Presbyterian  and  Puritan  influence  ;  and  this  oppor- 
tunity he  used  to  the  full  when  he  reached  London.  He  called 
a  conference  of  the  two  church  parties,  at  which  he  openly 
took  his  stand  for  Episcopacy  and  the  Church  of  England  as 
it  was,  and  renounced  all  connection  with  the  Puritans,  or 
favor  for  them.  He  told  the  Puritans  in  the  conference, 
"If  this  be  all  your  party  have  to  say,  I  will  make  them 
conform,  or  I  will  harrie  them  out  of  the  land,  or  else  worse 
—  hang  them,  that's  all."  Not  long  afterward,  he  declared 
in  his  council  of  State,  that  "his  mother  and  he  from  their 
cradles  had  been  haunted  with  a  Puritan  devil,  which  he 
feared  would  not  leave  him  to  his  grave  ;  and  that  he  would 
hazard  his  crown  but  he  would  suppress  those  malicious 
spirits."  -Bancroft.'1'''  Accordingly  he  issued  a  proclama- 
tion commanding  all  Puritans  to  conform  or  suffer  the  full 

35"Neal's  History  of  tbe  Puritans,"  part  ii,  chap,  i,  par.  2.  M  Id. 

37  "History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "  The  Pilgrims,"  par.  8. 


ORIGIN  OF   THE   CONGREGATIONALISTS.  599 

extremity  of  the  laws,  and  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury 
followed  it  up  "  with  unrelenting  rigor." 

Meanwhile,  some  of  the  Puritans  seeing  that  the  pros- 
pect from  new  Presbytery,  was  but  the  same  as  from  old 
priest,  only  writ  large,  drew  off  from  the  Puritan  party,  as 
well  as  from  the  Church  of  England,  and  advocated  a  com- 
plete separation  from  both  systems  as  to  church  govern- 
ment. They  held  that  each  church  or  assembly  of  worship- 
ers is  entirely  independent  of  all  others,  and  self-governing ; 
that  all  points  of  doctrine  or  discipline  are  to  be  submitted 
to  the  congregation  for  discussion  and  final  decision  ;  and 
that  each  congregation  should  elect  its  own  pastor,  etc. 
For  this  reason  they  were  called  Independents  or  Congregctr 
tionalists,  and  were  nicknamed  Separatists. 

Upon  these  the  wrath  of  both  Puritans  and  Conformists 
was  poured  with  about  equal  virulence.  As  early  as  1567, 
one  of  these  Congregations  was  formed  in  London ;  but  it 
was  forcibly  broken  up,  thirty-one  of  its  members  being 
imprisoned  for  nearly  a  year.  Persecution,  however,  only 
caused  their  numbers  to  grow,  and  by  15T6  they  formed  a 
distinct  sect  under  the  leadership  of  Robert  Brown,  from 
whom  they  were  again  nicknamed  Brownists.  .  -And  still 
they  were  subject  to  the  enmity  of  both  old  ecclesiastical 
parties.  Their  meetings  were  broken  up  by  mobs,  and  "the 
result  to  individuals  is  described  as  follows,  by  one  who 
wrote  at  the  time  an  account  of  a  "tumult  in  Fleet  street, 
raised  by  the  disorderly  preachment,  pratings,  and  prat- 
tlings  of  a  swarm  of  Separatists  :  — 

"At  length  they  catcht  one  of  them  alone,  but  they  kickt  him  so 
vehemently  as  if  they  meant  to  beat  him  into  a  jelly.  It  is  ambiguous 
whether  they  have  kil'd  him  or  no,  but  for  a  certainty  they  did  knock 
him  about  as  if  they  meant  to  pull  him  to  pieces.  I  confesse  it  had 
been  no  matter  if  they  had  beaten  tlje  whole  tribe  in  the  like  manner."38 

Ill  1592  Bacon  wrote  concerning  them:  "As  for  those 
which  we  call  Brownists,  being,  when  they  were  at  the 

"Beginnings  of  New  England,"  p.  67. 


600  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

most,  a  very  small  number  of  very  silly  and  base  people, 
here  and  there  in  corners  dispersed,  they  are  now,  thanks  to 
God,  by  the  good  remedies  that  have  been  used,  suppressed 
and  worn  out ;  so  that  there  is  scarce  any  news  of  them."39 
Yet  in  1593  there  were  twenty  thousand  of  them  ;  and  in 
the  same  year,  at  the  order  of  Archbishop  Whitgift,  three  of 
their  leading  men  were  hanged,  two  of  whom  had  already 
been  in  prison  seven  years.  The  crime  of  which  they  were 
convicted  and  for  which  they  were  executed,  was  "separa- 
tion from  the  Church  of  England." 

The  attitude  and  the  words  of  King  James,  were  simply 
a  proclamation  of  the  continuance  of  the  war  which  Eliza- 
beth had  already  waged  against  the  Puritans  and  Congrega- 
tionalists,  and  caused  the  Separatist  principles  and  numbers 
more  to  grow.  The  chief  of  the  Separatists  was  now  William 
Brewster,  a  prominent  man  of  Scrooby.  Assisted  by  John 
Robinson,  he  organized  a  congregation  in  1606,  which  held 
its  meetings  in  his  own  drawing-room  at  Scrooby  Manor. 
They  were  so  persecuted  and  abused  by  all  classes,  as  well 
as  by  the  officers  of  the  law,  that  in  1608  they  fled 
to  Holland,  stopping  first  at  Amsterdam,  and  afterward 
going  to  Leyden  in  1609.  From  there  a  company  of  these 
PILGRIMS  sailed,  and  landed  at  Plymouth,  New  England, 
in  1620. 

The  success  of  this  venture  suggested  to  the  Puritans  a 
new  scheme.  Was  not  here  an  opportunity  to  establish  a 
complete  and  unabridged  Puritan  government  ?  And  was 
not  the  way  fully  opened,  and  the  opportunity  easy  to  be 
improved  ?  Enough  !  They  would  do  it.  The  scheme  was 
talked  about,  pamphlets  were  written,  a  company  was 
formed,  a  grant  of  land  was  obtained,  and  John  Endicott, 
with  a  company  of  sixty,  was  sent  over  in  1628.  They 
joined  a  fishing  settlement  at  the  place  afterward  called 
Salem  on  Massachusetts  Bay. 

39 Bancroft's  "History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "Prelates  and  Puri- 
tans," par.  3  from  the  end. 


PURITAN  GOVERNMENT  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.         601 

In  1629  a  royal  charter  was  obtained,  creating  "The 
Government  and  Colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay  in  New  En- 
gland ; "  and  four  hundred  and  six  people,  led  by  Francis 
Higginson,  were  sent  over,  and  Endicott  became  governor 
of  the  whole  colony. 

A  Puritan  or  Calvinistic  government  was  at  once  estab- 
lished and  put  into  working  order.  A  church  was  immedi- 
ately organized  according  to  the  Congregational  form,  with 
Higginson  and  Samuel  Skelton  as  the  ministers.  All,  how- 
ever, were  not  inclined  to  Puritanism.  Two  persons  of  the 
former  company  at  Salem,  John  and  Samuel  Browne,  took 
the  lead  in  worshiping  according  to  their  own  wish,  conduct- 
ing their  service  after  the  Episcopal  order,  using  the  book  of 
common  prayer.  Their  worship  was  forbidden.  The 
Brownes  replied,  "  You  are  Separatists,  and  you  will  shortly 
be  Anabaptists."  The  Puritans  answered,  "We  separate, 
not  from  the  Church  of  England,  but  from  its  corruptions. 
We  came  away  from  the  common  prayer  and  ceremonies,  in 
our  native  land,  where  we  suffered  much  for  non-conformity  ; 
in  this  place  of  liberty  we  cannot,  we  will  not,  use  them. 
Their  imposition  would  be  a  sinful  violation  of  the  worship 
of  God."40  In  return  the  Brownes  were  rebuked  as  Separa- 
tists ;  their  defense  was  pronounced  sedition  ;  their  worship 
was  declared  mutiny  ;  and  they  were  sent  back  to  England 
as  "factious  and  evil-conditioned  men,"  Endicott  declaring 
that  "New  England  was  no  place  for  such  as  they." 

Higginson  died  in  the  winter  of  1629-30.  In  1630 
there  came  over  another  company  led  by  John  Winthrop 
and  Thomas  Dudley,  who  were  the  governor  and  deputy- 
governor  to  succeed  Endicott.  "Their  embarkation  in  1630 
was  the  signal  of  a  general  movement  on  the  part  of  the 
English  Puritans.  Before  Christmas  of  that  year  seven- 
teen ships  had  come  to  New  England,  bringing  more  than 
one  thousand  passengers." -—Flake.  "  Dudley's  views  of 

40 Bancroft's  "History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "New  England's  Planta- 
tion," last  par.  but  one.  41 "  Beginnings  of  New  England,"  pp.  103,  104. 


602  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

toleration  and  liberty  of   conscience    are  expressed   in   the 
following  lines,  which  he  wrote  :  — 

"Let  men  of  God  in  courts  and  churches  watch    ' 

O'er  such  as  do  a  toleration  hatch, 
Lest  that  ill  egg  bring  forth  a   cockatrice 
To  poison  all  with  heresy  and  vice."42 

And  Winthrop's  estimate  of  the 'preachers  is  seen  in  his 
declaration  that  "  I  honored  a  faithful  minister  in  my  heart, 
and  could  have  kissed  his  feet." 43  It  was  therefore  not  at  all 
strange  that  under  the  government  of  Winthrop  and  Dudley 
in  1631,  the  following  law  should  be  enacted  :  — 

"  To  the  end  this  body  of  the  commons  may  be  preserved  of  honest 
and  good  men,  it  is  ordered  and  agreed  that,  for  the  time  to  come,  no 
man  shall  be  admitted  to  the  freedom  of  this  body  politic  but  such  as 
are  members  of  some  of  the  churches  within  the  limits  of  the  same." 

"Thus  the  polity  became  a  theocracy  ;  God  himself  was 
to  govern  his  people  ;  and  the  '  saints  by  calling,'  .  .  .  were, 
by  the  fundamental  law  of  the  colony,  constituted  the  oracle 
of  the  divine  will.  .  .  .  Other  States  have  confined  political 
rights  to  the  opulent,  to  free-holders,  to  the  first-born  ;  the 
Calvinists  of  Massachusetts,  refusing  any  share  of  civil  power 
to  the  clergy,  established  the  reign  of  the  visible  church,  a 
commonwealth  of  the  chosen  people  in  covenant  with  God." 
—  Bancroft.^  This  was  the  Calvinistic  system  precisely. 
The  preachers  were  not  to  hold  office  in  itself,  but  they  were 
to  be  the  rulers  of  all  who  did.  For,  as  no  man  could  be  a 
citizen  unless  he  was  a  member  of  the  church  ;  and  as  none 
could  become  members  of  the  churches  or  even  "  propounded 
to  the  congregation,  except  they  be  first  allowed  by  the  elders  f 
this  was  to  make  the  preachers  supreme.  This  is  exactly  the 
position  they  occupied.  They  were  consulted  in  everything, 
and  everything  must  be  subject  to  their  dictation. 

42 Id.,  p.  103.          *3  Adams's  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  32. 
44 "  History  of  the  United    States,"  chap.  "  Self-Government   in  Massachu- 
setts," par.  25. 


NEW  ENGLAND  PURITAN  PRINCIPLES.  G03 

Other  companies  of  immigrants  continued  to  come,  and 
the  colony  rapidly  grew.  In  1634  there  were  nearly  four 
thousand  in  the  colony. 

In  1631  Roger  Williams  landed  in  Boston,  and  as  the 
death  of  Higginson  had  left  a  vacancy  in  the  church  at 
Salem,  the  church  called  Williams  to  fill  his  place  ;  but  as 
Winthrop  and  his  "assistants"  objected,  Williams  went  to 
Plymouth  Colony. 

The  leading  minister  in  Massachusetts  Colony  at  this 
time  was  John  Cotton.  He  distinctly  taught  the  blessedness 
of  persecution  in  itself,  and  in  its  benefit  to  the  State,  in  the 
following  words :  — 

"But  the  good  brought  to  princes  and  subjects  by  the  due  punish- 
ment of  apostate  seducers  and  idolaters  and  blasphemers,  is  manifold. 

"  First,  it  putteth  away  evill  from  among  the  people,  and  cutteth  off  a 
gangreene,  which  would  spread  to  further  ungodlinesse.  .  =  . 

"  Secondly,  it  driveth  away  wolves  from  worrying  and  scattering  the 
sheep  of  Christ.  For  false  teachers  be  wolves,  .  „  .  and  the  very  name 
of  wolves  holdeth  forth  what  benefit  will  redound  to  the  sheep,  by  either 
killing  them  or  driving  them  away. 

"  Thirdly,  such  executions  upon  such  evil  doers  causeth  all  the  country 
to  heare  and  feare  and  doe  no  more  such  wickednesse.  .  „  .  Yea,  as 
these  punishments  are  preventions  of  like  wickednesse  in  some,  so  are 
they  wholesome  medicines,  to  heale  such  as  are  curable  of  these 
eviles.  .  .  . 

"Fourthly,  the  punishments  executed  upon  false  prophets  and  seduc- 
ing teachers,  doe  bring  downe  showers  of  God's  blessings  upon  the 
civill  state.  .  .  . 

"  Fifthly,  it  is  an  honour  to  God's  justice  that  such  judgments  are 
executed."45  .  .  . 

And  Samuel  Shepard,  a  minister  of  Charlestown, 
preached  an  election  sermon  entitled  "Eye  Salve,"  in 
which  he  set  forth  the  following  views  :  — 

"Men's  lusts  are  sweet  to  them,  and  they  would  not  be  disturbed  or 
disquieted  in  their  sin.  Hence  there  be  so  many  such  as  cry  up  tollera- 
tion  boundless  and  libertinism  so  as  (if  it  were  in  their  power)  to  order  a 

45  "The  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  35,36. 


604  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

total  and  perpetual  confinement  o.f  the  sword  of  the  civil  magistrate 
unto  its  scabbard  (a  motion  that  is  evidently  distructive  to  this  people, 
and  to  the  publick  liberty,  peace,  and  prosperity  of  any  instituted 
churches  under  heaven). 

"Let  the  magistrate's  coercive  power  in  matters  of  religion,  there- 
fore, be  still  asserted,  seeing  he  is  one  who  is  bound  to  God  more  than 
any  other  man  to  cherish  his  true  religion  ;  .  .  .  and  how  wofull  would 
the  state  of  things  soon  be  among  us,  if  men  might  have  liberty  without 
controll  to  profess,  or  preach,  or  print,  or  publish  what  they  list,%tending 
to  the  seduction  of  others."46 

In  accordance  with  these  principles,  every  inhabitant  of 
the  colony  was  obliged  to  attend  the  services  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  on  Sunday  under  penalty  of  fine  or  imprison- 
ment. The  fine  was  not  to  exceed  five  shillings,  equal  to 
about  five  dollars  of  the  present  day,  for  every  absence. 

About  1633  Roger  Williams  was  called  a  second  time  to 
the  ministry  of  the  Salem  church.  This  time  he  was  al- 
lowed to  take  the  place  ;  but  it  was  not  long  before  he  was 
again  in  trouble  with  the  theocrats.  He  denounced  their 
laws  making  church  membership  a  qualification  for  office, 
and  all  their  laws  enforcing  religious  observances. 

He  declared  that  the  worst  law  in  the  English  code  was 
that  by  which  they  themselves  when  in  England  had  been 
compelled  to  attend  the  parish  church  ;  and  he  reproved 
their  inconsistency  in  counting  that  persecution  in  England, 
and  then  doing  the  same  things  themselves  in  New  England. 

They  maintained,  as  argued  by  Cotton,  that  "persecution 
is  not  wrong  in  itself.  It  is  wicked  for  falsehood  to  perse- 
cute truth,  but  it  is  the  sacred  duty  of  truth  to  persecute 
falsehood."  And,  as  stated  by  Winthrop,  that  "we  have 
come  to  New  England  in  order  to  make  a  society  after  our 
own  model ;  all  who  agree  with  us  may  come  and  join  that 
society  ;  those  who  disagree  may  go  elsewhere  ;  there  is 
room  enough  on  the  American  continent."*7 

Roger  Williams  told  them  that  to  compel  men  to  unite 
with  those  of  a  different  faith  is  an  open  violation  of  natural 

« Id.,  pp.  36,  37. 

17  "  Beginnings  of  New  England,"  p.  178. 


ROGER   WILLIAMS  AGAINST  PURITANISM.  605 

right ;  and  that  to  drag  to  public  worship  the  irreligious  and 
the  unwilling,  is  only  to  require  hypocrisy.  "Persons  may 
with  less  sin  be  forced  to  marry  whom  they  cannot  love, 
than  to  worship  where  they  cannot  believe."48  Accordingly 
he  insisted  that  "no  one  should  be  bound  to  worship  or  to 
maintain  a  worship  against  his  own  consent." 

At  this  the  theocrats  inquired  with  pious  amaze,  "What, 
is  not  the  laborer  worthy  of  his  hire  2 "  To  which  Roger 
replied  in  words  which  they  could  not  fail  fully  to  under- 
stand, "  Yes,  from  them  that  hire  him" 

The  view  that  the  magistrates  must  be  chosen  exclusively 
from  membership  in  the  churches,  he  exploded  with  the 
argument  that  with  equal  propriety  they  should  select  a 
doctor  of  physic  or  the  pilot  of  a  ship,  because  of  his  stand- 
ing in  the  church. 

Against  the  statements  of  Cotton  and  Shepard  and  the 
claims  of  the  theocrats  altogether,  as  to  the  right  of  the  magis- 
trate to  forestall  corrupting  influences  upon  the  minds  of 
the  people,  and  to  punish  error  and  heresy,  he  set  the  evi- 
dent and  everlasting  truth  that  "magistrates  are  but  the 
agents  of  the  people  or  its  trustees,  on  whom  no  spiritual 
power  in  matters  of  worship  can  ever  be  conferred,  since 
conscience  belongs  to  the  individual,  and  is  not  the  property 
of  the  body  politic  ;  .  .  .  the  civil  magistrate  may  not  inter- 
meddle even  to  stop  a  church  from  apostasy  and  heresy  ; 
this  power  extends  only  to  the  bodies  and  goods  and  out- 
ward estate  of  men."49 

The  theocrats  raised  the  alarm  that  these  principles  sub- 
verted all  good  government.  To  which  he  replied  :  "There 
goes  many  a  ship  to  sea,  with  many  hundred  souls  in  one 
ship,  whose  weal  and  woe  is  common,  and  is  a  true  picture 
of  a  commonwealth  or  a  human  combination  or  society.  It 
hath  fallen  out  sometimes  that  both  Papists  and  Protestants, 
Jews  and  Turks,  may  be  embarked  in  one  ship  ;  upon  which 

48Backus's  "Church  History  of  New  England,"  pp.  62,  63. 
49 Bancroft's   "History   of    the    United    States,"    chap.    "The   Providence 
Plantations,"  par.  3-6. 


606  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

supposal  I  affirm  that  all  the  liberty  of  conscience  that  ever 
I  pleaded  for  turns  upon  these  two  hinges,  that  none  of  the 
Papists,  Protestants,  Jews,  or  Turks  be  forced  to  come  to 
the  ship's  prayers  or  worship,  nor  compelled  from  their 
particular  prayers  or  worship,  if  they  practice  any."50  "The 
removal  of  the  yoke  of  soul-oppression,  as  it  will  prove  an 
act  of  mercy  and  righteousness  to  the  enslaved  nations,  so  it 
is  of  binding  force  to  engage  the  whole  and  every  interest 
and  conscience  to  preserve  the  common  liberty  and  peace."51 

He  also  denied  the  right  of  the  compulsory  imposition  of 
an  oath.  The  magistrates  had  decided  to  require  an  oath  of 
allegiance  to  Massachusetts,  instead  of  to  the  king  of  En- 
gland. Williams  would  not  take  the  oath,  and  his  influence 
was  so  great  that  so  many  others  refused  also  that  the  gov- 
ernment wras  compelled  to  drop  the  project.  This  caused 
them  to  raise  a  charge  against  him  as  the  ally  of  a  civil 
faction.  The  church  at  Salem  stood  by  him,  and  in  the  face 
of  the  enmity  of  the  theocrats  elected  him  their  teacher. 
This  was  no  sooner  done  than  the  preachers  met  together 
and  declared  that  any  one  who  should  obstinately  assert 
that  "the  civil  magistrate  might  not  intermeddle  even  to 
stop  a  church  from  apostasy  and  heresy,"  was  worthy  of 
banishment.  A  committee  of  their  order  was  appointed  to 
go  to  Salem  and  deal  with  Williams  and  the  church  "  in  a 
church  way." 

Meantime  the  people  of  Salem  were  punished  for  choos- 
ing him  for  their  teacher,  by  the  withholding  of  a  tract  of 
land  to  which  they  had  laid  claim.  Williams  was  ready  to 
meet  the  committee  at  every  point  in  expressing  and  defin- 
ing his  doctrines,  and  in  refuting  all  their  claims.  After  the 
committee  had  returned,  the  church  by  Williams  wrote  let- 
ters to  all  the  churches  of  which  any  of  the  magistrates  were 
members,  ' '  that  they  should  admonish  the  magistrates  of 

60Blakely's  "American  State  Papers,"  page  68,  note. 

81  Bancroft's  "History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "The  Providence 
Plantations,"  par.  6. 


BANISHMENT  OF  ROGER    WILLIAMS.  607 

their  injustice."  By  the  next  general  court  the  whole  of 
Salem  was  disfranchised  until  they  should  apologize  for 
these  letters.  The  town  and  the  church  yielded.  Roger 
Williams  stood  alone.  He  was  able  and  willing  to  do  it, 
and  at  once  declared  his  "  own  voluntary  withdrawing  from 
all  these  churches  which  were  resolved  to  continue  in  perse- 
cuting the  witnesses  of  the  Lord,"  and  "hoped  the  Lord 
Jesus  was  sounding  forth  in  him  the  blast  which  should  in 
his  own  holy  season  cast  down  the  strength  and  confidence 
of  those  inventions  of  men."  In  October,  1635,  he  was 
summoned  before  the  chief  representatives  of  the  State. 
He  went  and  ' '  maintained  the  rocky  strength  "  of  his  posi- 
tion, and  declared  himself  "ready  to  be  bound  and  ban- 
ished, and  even  to  die  in  New  England,"  rather  than  to  re- 
nounce his  convictions. 

By  the  earnest  persuasions  of  Cotton,  the  general  court 
of  1635,  by  a  small  majority,  sentenced  him  to  exile,  and  at 
the  same  time  .attempted  to  justify  the  sentence  by  the 
flimsy  plea  that  it  was  not  a  resjtrainment  on  freedom  of  con- 
science, but  because  the  application  of  the  new  doctrine  to 
their  institutions  seemed  "to  subvert  the  fundamental  state 
and  government  of  the  country."  In  January,  1636,  a  war- 
rant was  sent  to  him  to  come  to  Boston  and  take  ship  for 
England.  He  refused  to  go.  Officers  were  sent  in  a  boat 
to  bring  him,  but  he  was  gone.  "  Three  days  before,  he  had 
left  Salem,  in  winter  snow  and  inclefnent  weather,  of  which 
he  remembered  the  severity  even  in  his  late  old  age.  '  For 
fourteen  weeks  he  was  sorely  tost  in  a  bitter  season,  not 
knowing  what  bread  or  bed  did  mean.'  Often  in  the 
stormy  night  he  had  neither  fire,  nor  food,  nor  company  ; 
often  he  wandered  without  a  guide,  and  had  no  house  but  a 
hollow  tree.  But  he  was  not  without  friends.  The  respect  for 
the  rights  of  others  which  had  led  him  to  defend  the  freedom 
of  conscience,  had  made  him  the  champion  of  the  In- 
dians. He  had  learned  their  language  during  his  residence 
at  Plymouth  ;  he  had  often  been  the  guest  of  the  neighbor- 


608  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

ing  sachems  ;  and  now,  when  he  carne  in  winter  to  the  cabin 
of  the  chief  of  Pokanoket,  he  was  welcomed  by  Massassoit ; 
and  '  the  barbarous  heart  of  Canonicus,  the  chief  of  the  Nar- 
ragansetts,  loved  him  as  his  son  to  the  last  gasp.'  'The 
ravens,'  he  relates,  'fed  me  in  the  wilderness.'  "52 

The  act  of  1631  making  membership  in  the  church  a  test 
of  citizenship  had  involved  the  theocrats  in  another  dilemma. 
There  was  a  considerable  number  of  people  who  were  not 
members  of  the  churches,  and  because  of  unfitness  could 
not  be  admitted.  Even  more  than  this,  they  did  not  want  to 
be  admitted.  But  as  membership  in  the  church  was  neces- 
sary to  citizenship,  and  as  they  wanted  to  be,  and  deemed  it 
their  right  to  be,  citizens,  they  took  to  organizing  churches 
of  their  own.  But  the  theocrats  were  not  willing  that 
power  should  slip  through  their  fingers  in  any  such  way  as 
this  ;  they  found  not  only  a  way  to  escape  from  the  dilemma, 
but  with  that  to  make  their  power  more  absolute.  In  1635 
the  following  law  was  enacted  :  — 

"Forasmuch  as  it  hath  bene  fsund  by  sad  experience,  that  much 
trouble  and  disturbance  hath  happened  both  to  the  Church  &  civill  State 
by  the  officers  &  members  of  some  churches,  wch  have  bene  gathered  .  .  . 
in  an  vudue  manner,  ...  it  is  ...  ordered  that  .  .  .  this  court  doeth 
not,  nor  will  hereafter  approue  of  any  such  companyes  of  men  as  shall 
henceforth  ioyne  in  any  pretended  way  of  church  fellowshipp,  without 
they  shall  first  acquainte  the  magistrates,  &  the  elders  of  the  greatr  pte 
of  the  churches  in  this  jurisdicon,  with  their  intencons,  and  have  their 
approbacon  herein.  And  ffurther,  it  is  ordered,  that  noe  pson,  being  a 
member  of  any  churche  which  shall  hereafter  be  gathered  without  the 
approbacon  of  the  magistrates,  &  the  greater  pte  of  the  said  churches 
shall  be  admitted  to  theffreedome  of  this  comonwealthe."53 

In  May,  1636,  Henry  Yane  was  elected  governor.  Some 
time  before  this  Anne  Hutchinson,  with  her  family,  had 
come  over  from  Lincolnshire,  being  followed  later  by  her 
brother-in-law,  John  Wheelwright.  She  was  an  excellent 
woman,  and  made  many  friends,  and  at  her  house  held  re- 

52  Jd.,  par.  7-11. 

63  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  29. 


JOHN  WHEELWRIGHT  AND  HIS  PREACHING.       609 

ligious  meetings  for  women.  The  object  of  these  meetings 
was  to  talk  over  the  sermons  for  mutual  edification  ;  but  as 
was  natural,  they  drifted  into  the  discussion  of  the  ministers 
rather  than  their  sermons.  In  one  of  these  meetings  Mrs. 
Hutchinson  happened  to  remark  that  of  the  ministers  "  none 
did  preach  the  covenant  of  free  grace  but  Master  Cotton," 
and  that  they  "  had  not  the  seal  of  the  Spirit,  and  so  were 
not  able  ministers  of  the  New  Testament."  This  remark 
soon  got  into  circulation  among  the  preachers,  and  of  course 
was  not  at  all  palatable. 

As  Cotton  was  named  as  the  one  exemplary  minister,  in 
October  the  ministers  went  in  a  body  to  his  house  to  call  him 
to  account.  Cotton  proposed  that  the  other  ministers  and 
Mrs.  Hutchinson  should  have  a  friendly  interview  at  his 
house,  in  order  to  come  to  an  understanding.  She,  suspect- 
ing a  trap,  was  rather  wary  at  first,  and  declined  to  commit 
herself  to  any  definite  statement  upon  the  point  at  issue,  but 
being  urged  by  the  "Kev."  Hugh  Peters  to  deal  fairly  and 
honestly  with  them,  she  allowed  herself  at  last  to  be  per- 
suaded to  say  that  the  report  was  in  substance  true,  and  that 
she  did  in  truth  see  a  wide  difference  between  Cotton's 
preaching  and  theirs;  "that  they  could  not  preach  a  cove- 
nant of  grace  so  clearly  as  he,  because  they  had  not  the  seal 
of  the  Spirit." 

Instead  of  the  preachers'  being  reconciled  to  Mrs  Hutch- 
inson's  view,  or  to  Cotton,  their  enmity  was  deepened. 
The  matter  spread  more  and  more,  and  the  colony  was  di- 
vided into  two  parties  ;  and  at  the  head  of  the  Hutchinson 
party  was  Yane,  the  governor. 

In  January  1637,  on  a  fast-day,  .John  Wheelwright 
preached  in  Boston  to  the  effect  that  "it  maketh  no  matter 
how  seemingly  holy  men  be  according  to  the  law,  if  ... 
they  are  such  as  trust  to  their  own  righteousness  they  shall 
die,  saith  the  Lord.  Do  ye  not  after  their  works  ;  for  they 
say  and  do  not.  They  make  broad  their  phylacteries,  and 
enlarge  the  borders  of  their  garments  ;  and  love  the  upper- 


610  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

most  rooms  at  feasts,  and  the  chief  seats  in  the  synagogues ; 
and  greetings  in  the  market  place,  and  to  be  called  of  men, 
Rabbi,  Rabbi.  But  believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
ye  shall  be  saved,  for  being  justified  by  faith  we  have  peace 
with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  And  the  way  we 
must  take  if  so  be  we  will  not  have  the  Lord-  Jesus  Christ 
taken  from  us  is  this  :  we  must  all  prepare  a  spiritual  combat, 
we  must  put  on  the  whole  armor  of.  God,  and  must  have  our 
loins  girt  up  and  be  ready  to  fight ;  .  .  .  because  of  fear,  in 
the  night,  if  we  will  not  fight,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  may 
come  to  be  surprised.''54 

This  brought  matters  to  a  crisis.  In  March  the  legislature 
met,  and  a  court  was  appointed,  composed  of  Henry  Vane, 
twelve  magistrates,  twelve  preachers,  and  thirty-three  depu- 
ties. Wheelwright  was  arraigned  before  the  court.  His 
sermon  was  brought  forth,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to 
have  him  admit  that  when  he  spoke  in  the  sermon  of  those 
under  a  covenant  of  works,  he  meant  his  brother  ministers 
in  the  colony.  Of  course  it  was  easy  for  him  to  throw  the 
matter  on  them.  He  demanded  that  they  controvert  his 
doctrine.  He  said  he  was  ready  to  prove  by  the  Scriptures 
that  the  doctrine  was  true.  As  to  who  was  meant  in  the 
sermon,  he  told  them  that  "if  he  were  shown  any  that 
walked  in  such  a  way  as  he  had  described  to  be  a  covenant 
of  works,  them  did  he  mean."  The  rest  of  the  ministers 
were  asked  by  the  court  if  they  "did  walk  in  such  a  way." 
"They  all  acknowledged  that  they  did,"  except  Cotton,  who 
declared  that  "Brother  Wheelwright's  doctrine  was  accord- 
ing to  God  in  the  parts  controverted,  and  wholly  and  alto- 
gether." 

By  hard  work  the  opposition  succeeded  in  having  Wheel- 
wright convicted  of  sedition  ;  but  they  were  not  able  to 
secure  sentence  at  once,  and  had  him  remanded  to  the  next 
session.  As  soon  as  the  decision  was  known,  more  than 
sixty  of  the  leading  citizens  of  Boston  signed  a  petition  to 
64  "  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  55. 


WHEELWRIGHT  18  BANISHED.  611 

the  court  in  behalf  of  Wheelwright,  in  which  they  referred 
to  the  persecution  as  a  restriction  of  the  right  of  free  speech, 
and  among  other  things  said  :  — 

"Paul  was  counted  a  pestilent  fellow,  or  a  mover  of  sedition,  and 
a  ringleader  of  a  sect,  .  .  .  and  Christ  himselfe,  as  well  as  Paul,  was 
charged  to  bee  a  teacher  of  new  doctrine.  .  .  .  Now  wee  beseech  you, 
consider  whether  that  old  serpent  work  not  after  his  old  method,  even 
in  our  daies.  .  .  .  Thirdly,  if  you  look  at  the  effects  of  his  doctrine 
upon  the  hearers,  it  hath  not  stirred  up  sedition  in  us,  not  so  much  as 
by  accident ;  wee  have  not  drawn  the  sword,  as  sometimes  Peter  did, 
rashly,  neither  hare  wee  rescued  our  innocent  brother,  as  sometimes  the 
Israelites  did  Jonathan  ;  and  yet  they  did  not  seditiously.  The  covenant 
of  free  grace  held  forth  by  our  brother  hath  taught  us  rather  to  become 
humble  suppliants  to  your  worships,  and  if  wee  should  not  prevaile,  wee 
would  rather  with  patience  give  our  cheekes  to  the  smiters."55 

It  is  not  necessary  to  follow  particulars  farther  ;  the 
question  was  made  the  issue  at  the  next  election.  Wheel- 
wright's enemies  carried  the  day,  electing  Winthrop  gov- 
ernor. At  the  next  session  held  in  November,  he  was 
summoned  to  appear,  and  was  ordered  to  submit,  or  pre- 
pare for  sentence.  He  maintained  that  as  he  had  preached 
only  the  truth  of  Christ,  he  was  guilty  of  neither  sedition 
nor  contempt.  The  court  replied  that  they  had  not  cen- 
sured his  doctrine,  but  had  left  that  as  it  was  ;  but  the  cen- 
sure was  upon  the  application  by  which  "  he  laid  the  magis- 
trates and  ministers  and  most  of  the  people  in  this  church 
under  a  covenant  of  works."  He  was  sentenced  to  be  dis- 
franchised and  banished,  and  he  was  given  fourteen  days  to 
leave  Massachusetts.  Like  Roger  Williams,  he  was  com- 
pelled to  go  forth  alone  in  the  bitterness  of  the  New 
England  winter. 

Wheelwright  was  no  sooner  out  of  the  way  than  they  pro- 
ceeded to  try  his  friends  who  had  presented  the  petition,  and 
these  men  who  had  not  only  in  the  petition  disclaimed  any 
thought  of  sedition,  but  had  said  that  if  their  petition  was 
not  heard,  they  "would  rather  with  patience  give  their 

65 /d.,  p.  57. 


612  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

cheekes  to  the  smiters,"  were  held  to  be  public  enemies. 
"Such  scruples,  however,  never  hampered  the  theocracy. 
Their  justice  was  trammeled  neither  by  judges,  by  juries, 
nor  by  laws." — Adams.56 

This  accomplished,  they  next  proceeded  to  execute  ven- 
geance on  Anne  Hutchinson,  the  chief  traitor,  and  the  cause 
of  all  their  dissension.  In  November,  1637,  "she  was 
brought  to  trial  before  that  ghastliest  den  of  human  iniquity, 
an  ecclesiastical  criminal  court.  The  ministers  were  her  ac- 
cusers, who  came  burning  with  hate  to  testify  to  the  words 
she  had  spoken  to  them  at  their  own  request,  in  the  belief 
that  the  confidence  she  reposed  was  to  be  held  sacred.  She 
had  no  jury  to  whose  manhood  she  could  appeal,  and  John 
Winthrop,  to  his  lasting  shame,  was  to  prosecute  her  from 
the  judgment  seat.  She  was  soon  to  become  a  mother,  and 
her  health  was  feeble  ;  but  she  was  made  to  stand  till  she 
was  exhausted  ;  and  yet  abandoned  and  forlorn,  before 
those  merciless  judges,  through  two  long,  weary  days  of 
hunger  and  of  cold,  the  intrepid  woman  defended  her  cause 
with  a  skill  and  courage  which  even  now,  after  two  hundred 
and  fifty  years,  kindles  the  heart  with  admiration. 

"The  case  for  the  government  was  opened  by  John  Win- 
throp, the  presiding  justice,  the  attorney-general,  the  fore- 
man of  the  jury,  and  the  chief  magistrate  of  Massachusetts 
Bay.  lie  upbraided  the  prisoner  with  her  many  evil  courses, 
with  having  spoken  things  prejudicial  to  the  honor  of  the 
ministers,  with  holding  an  assembly  in  her  house,  and  with 
divulging  the  opinions  held  by  those  who  had  been  censured 
by  that  court." — Adams.5'1  The  proceedings  then  continued 
after  the  following  order  :  — 

Governor  Winthrop.  —  ' '  We  have  thought  good  to  send 
for  you,  .  .  .  that  if  you  be  in  an  erroneous  way,  we  may 
reduce  you  that  so  you  may  become  a  profitable  member 
here  among  us  ;  otherwise  if  you  be  obstinate,  .  .  .  that 
then  the  court  may  take  such  course  that  you  may  trouble 

56  Id.,  p.  65.  blld.,  pp.  65,  66. 


THE  PURITAN  INQUISITION.  613 

us  no  further.  Therefore  I  would  entreat  you  .  .  .  whether 
you  do  not  justify  Mr.  Wheelwright's  sermon  and  the 
petition  ? " 

Mrs.  Ilutchinson.  —  "I  am  called  here  to  answer  before 
you,  but  I  hear  no  things  laid  to  my  charge." 

Gov.  —  "I  have  told  you  some  already,  and  more  I  can 
tell  you." 

Mrs.  II.  —  "  Name  one,  sir." 

Gov.  —  "Have  I  not  named  some  already?  " 

Mrs.  II.  —  "  What  have  I  said  or  done  ?  "  .   .   . 

Gov.  —  "  You  have  joined  with  them  in  faction." 

Mrs.  II.  —  "  In  what  faction  have  I  joined  them  ?  " 

Gov. — "In  presenting  the  petition."  .   .   . 

Mrs.  H.  —  "  But  I  had  not  my  hand  to  the  petition." 

Gov.  —  "  You  have  counseled  them." 

Mrs.  II.  —  "Wherein  ?  " 

Gov.  —  "Why,  in  entertaining  them." 

Mrs.  If.  —  "  What  breach  of  law  is  that,  sir?  " 

Gov.  —  ' '  Why,  dishonoring  of  parents. "  .   ,   . 

Mrs.  II.  —  "I  may  put  honor  upon  them  as  the  children 
of  God,  and  as  they  do  honor  the  Lord." 

Gov.  —  "We  do  not  mean  to  discourse  with  those  of 
your  sex,  but  only  this  :  you  do  adhere  unto  them,  and  do 
endeavor  to  set  forward  this  faction,  and  so  you  do  dis- 
honor us" 

Mrs.  II.  —  "I  do  acknowledge  no  such  thing,  neither  do 
I  think  that  I  ever  put  any  dishonor  upon  you." 

Dep.-Gov.  —  "I  would  go  a  little  higher  with  Mrs.  Hutch- 
inson.  Now  ....  if  she  in  particular  hath  disparaged  all 
our  ministers  in  the  land  that  they  have  preached  a  covenant 
of  works,  and  only  Mr.  Cotton  a  covenant  of  grace,  why 
this  is  not  to  be  suffered. ''  .  .  . 

Mrs.  II.  —  "I  pray,  sir,  prove  it,  that  I  said  they 
preached  nothing  but  a  covenant  of  works."  .  .  . 

Dep.-Gov.  —  "If  they  do  not  preach  a  covenant  of  grace, 
clearly,  then,  they  preach  a  covenant  of  works," 

47 


614  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

Mrs,  H.  —  "No,  sir;  one  may  preach  a  covenant  of 
grace  more  clearly  than  another,  so  I  said." 

Rev.  Hugh  Peters.  —  "That  which  concerns  us  to  speak 
unto,  as  yet  we  are  sparing  in,  unless  the  court  command  us 
to  speak,  then  we  shall  answer  to  Mrs.  Hutchinson,  notwith- 
standing our  brethren  are  very  unwilling  to  answer.  Myself 
and  others  had  heard  that  the  prisoner  said  we  taught  a  cove- 
nant of  works  ;  we  sent  for  her,  and  though  she  was  '  very 
tender '  at  first,  yet  upon  being  begged  to  speak  plainly,  she 
explained  that  there  '  M-as  a  broad  difference  '  between  our 
Brother  Mr.  Cotton  and  ourselves.  I  desired  to  know 
the  difference.  She  answered  '  that  he  preaches  the  cove- 
nant of  grace  and  you  the  covenant  of  works,'  and  that  you 
are  not  able  ministers  of  the  New  Testament,  and  know  no 
more  than  the  apostles  did  before  the  resurrection." 

Mrs.  II.  —  "If  our  pastor  would  show  his  writings,  you 
should  see  what  I  said,  and  that  things  are  not  so  as  is  re- 
ported." 

Mr.  Wilson.  —  "  Sister  Hutchinson,  for  the  writings  you 
speak  of,  I  have  them  not."  .  .  . 

Peters  was  followed  by  five  other  preachers,  who  first 
with  hypocritical  meekness  expressed  themselves  as  loth  to 
speak  in  this  assembly  concerning  that  gentlewoman,  yet  to 
ease  their  consciences  in  the  relatio'n  wherein  they  stood 
to  the  commonwealth  and  unto  God,  they  felt  constrained 
to  state  that  the  prisoner  had  said  they  were  not  able  minis- 
ters of  the  New  Testament,  and  that  the  whole  of  what  Hugh 
Peters  had  testified  was  true.  The  court  then  adjourned  till 
the  next  day. 

When  the  court  opened  the  next  day,  Mrs.  Hutchin- 
son began  her  defense  by  calling  as  her  witnesses  Messrs. 
Leverett,  Coggeshall,  and  Cotton.  And  the  inquisitorial  mill 
again  began  to  grind. 

Gov.   Wintlirop.  —  "Mr.  Coggeshall  was  not  present." 
Coggeshall.  —  ' '  Yes,  but  I  was  ;  only  I  desired  to  be  silent 
till  I  should  be  called." 


.PURITAN  COVENANT  OF  GRACE.  615 

Gov.  — "Will  you  .   .   .  say  that  she  did  not  say  so  ? " 

Mr.  C.  —  "  Yes,  I  dare  say  that  she  did  not  say  all  that 
which  they  lay  against  her." 

Mr.  Peters.  —  "  How  dare  you  look  into  the  court  to  say 
such  a  word? " 

Mr.  C.  —  "Mr.  Peters  takes  upon  him  to  forbid  me.  I 
shall  be  silent."  .  .  . 

Gov.  —  "Well,  Mr.  Leverett,  what  were  the  words?  I 
pray  speak." 

Mr.  Leverett.  —  "To  my  best  remembrance,  .  .  .  Mr. 
Peters  did  with  much  vehemency  and  entreaty  urge  her  to 
tell  what  difference  there  was  between  Mr.  Cotton  and  them, 
and  upon  his  urging  of  her  she  said  :  '  The  fear  of  man  is 
a  snare,  but  they  that  trust  upon  the  Lord  shall  be  safe.' 
And  .  .  .  that  they  did  not  preach  a  covenant  of  grace 
so  clearly  as  Mr.  Cotton  did,  and  she  gave  this  reason 
of  it,  because  that  as  the  apostles  were  for  a  time  with- 
out the  Spirit,  so  until  they  had  received  the  witness  of 
the  Spirit  they  could  not  preach  a  covenant  of  grace  so 
clearly." 

Cotton  was  next  called,  and  took  his  place  as  witness. 

Mr.  Cotton. — "I  must  say  that  I  did  not  find  her  saying 
they  were  under  a  covenant  of  works,  nor  that  she  said  they 
did  preach  a  covenant  of  works." 

Gov. — "You  say  you  do  not  remember  ;  but  can  you  say 
she  did  not  speak  so  ?  " 

Mr.  C. — "I  do  remember  that  she  looked  at  them  as 
the  apostles  before  the  ascension."  .  .  . 

Dep.-Gov. — "They  affirm  that  Mrs.  Hutchinson  did  say 
they  were  not  able  ministers  of  the  New  Testament." 

Mr.  C. — "I  do  not  remember  it."58 

Mrs.  Hutchinson  believed  also  in  the  abiding  presence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  in  the  promise  of  Christ  that  the 
Spirit  will  guide  the  Christian,  especially  in  the  understand- 
ing of  the  Scriptures.  She  therefore  taught  that  "the  Holy 

58  "  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  66-70. 


616  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

Ghost  dwells  in  a  justified  person,"  and  that  it  is  the  duty 
of  Christians  to  "follow  the  bidding  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 
For  this  she  was  regarded  by  the  formalistic  Puritans  as 
little  less  than  a  raving  fanatic,  and  her  teachings  as  tending 
to  anarchy.  And  as  "there  was  nothing  which  the  ortho- 
dox Puritan  so  steadfastly  abhorred  as  the  anarchical  pre- 
tense of  living  by  the  aid  of  a  supernatural  light,"  she  was 
denounced  as  "weakening  the  hands  and  hearts  of  the 
people  toward  the  ministers,"  and  as  being  "like  Roger 
Williams,  or  worse."59 

Now  at  her  trial,  knowing  that  although  the  court  was 
worsted  in  its  case  as  to  the  main  point,  and  that  she  had  no 
hope  of  escape  without  an  attack  upon  this  phase  of  her 
belief,  she  chose  rather  to  introduce  the  matter  herself  than 
to  allow  the  court  to  force  her  upon  ground  of  their  own 
choosing.  She  therefore  stated  that  she  knew  by  the  Spirit 
of  God  that  her  teachings  were  the  truth,  and  closed  a  short 
speech  as  follows  :  — 

Mrs.  II. —  "Now  if  you  condemn  me  for  speaking  what 
in  my  conscience  I  know  to  be  truth,  I  must  commit  myself 
unto  the  Lord." 

Mr.  Nowell. —  "How  do  you  know  that  that  was  the 
Spirit?" 

Mrs.  II. —  "  How  did  Abraham  know  that  it  was  God  ?  " 

Dep.-Gov. —  "By  an  immediate  voice." 

Mrs.  II. —  "  So  to  me  by  an  immediate  revelation." 

She  next  stated  to  the  court  her  conviction  that  the  Lord 
had  showed  to  her  that  she  would  be  delivered  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  court,  and  referred  to  some  passages  in  the 
book  of  Daniel.  In  the  condition  in  which  the  poor  woman 
was,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  under  the  continued 
and  cruel  goading  of  the  court,  she  should  speak  the  follow- 
ing words :  — 

Mrs.  II.  —  "  You  have  power  over  my  body,  but  the 
Lord  Jesus  hath  power  over  my  body  and  soul ;  and  assure 

59  «  Beginnings  of  New  England,"  p.  49  ;  and  Bancroft's  "  History  of  the 
United  States,"  chap.  "  The  Colonization  of  New  Hampshire,"  par.  8. 


MRS.   HUTCHINSON  IS  CONDEMNED.  61 T 

yourselves  thus  much,  you  do  as  much  as  in  you  lies  to  put 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  from  you,  and  if  you  go '  on  in  this 
course  you  begin,  you  will  bring  a  curse  upon  you  and  your 
posterity,  and  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it.'1 

Gov. —  "Daniel  was  delivered  by  miracle.  Do  you 
think  to  be  delivered  so  too  ?  " 

Mrs.  If. —  "  I  do  here  speak  it  before  the  court.  I  look 
that  the  Lord  should  deliver  me  by  his  providence."  .  .  . 

Dep.-Gov. —  "I  desire  Mr.  Cotton  to  tell  us  whether 
you  do  approve  of  Mrs.  Hutchinson's  revelations  as  she 
hath  laid  them  down." 

Mr.  C. —  "I  know  not  whether  I  understand  her;  but 
this  I  say,  If  she  doth  expect  a  deliverance  in  a  way  of 
providence,  then  I  cannot  deny  it." 

Gov. —  .  .  .  "I  see  a  marvelous  providence  of  God  to 
bring  things  to  this  pass.  .  .  .  God  by  a  providence  hath 
answered  our  desires,  and  made  her  to  lay  open  herself 
and  the  ground  of  all  these  disturbances  to  be  by  revela- 
tions." .'.  . 

Court. —  "We  all  consent  with  you." 

Gov. —  "Ey,  it  is  the  most  desperate  enthusiasm  in  the 
world."  .  .  . 

Mr.  Endicott. —  "I  speak  in  reference  to  Mr.  Cotton. 
.  .  .  Whether  do  you  witness  for  her  or  against  her  ?  " 

Mr.  C. —  "This  is  that  I  said,  sir,  and  my  answer  is 
plain,  that  if  she  doth  look  for  deliverance  from  the  hand  of 
God  by  his  providence,  and  the  revelation  be  ...  accord- 
ing to  a  word  [of  Scripture],  that  I  cannot  deny." 

Mr.  Endicott.  —  "  You  give  me  satisfaction." 

Dep.-Gov. —  "No,  no  ;  he  gives  me  none  at  all." 

Mr.  C.  —  "I  pray,  sir,  give  me  leave  to  express  myself. 
In  that  sense  that  she  speaks  I  dare  not  bear  witness 
against  it." 

Mr.  Nowell.  —  "I  think  it  is  a  devilish  delusion." 

Gov.  —  "  Of  all  the  revelations  that  ever  I  read  of,  I 
never  read  the  like  ground  laid  as  is  for  this.  The  enthu- 
siasts and  Anabaptists  had  never  the  like."  .  .  . 


618  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

Mr.  Peters.  —  "I  can  say  the  same  ;  .  .  .  and  I  think 
that  is  very  disputable  which  our  Brother  Cotton  hath 
spoken."  .  .  . 

Gov.  —  "I  am  persuaded  that  the  revelation  she  brings 
forth  is  delusion. " 

All  the  court  (except  two  or  three  ministers).  —  "  We  all 
believe  it,  we  all  believe  it."  .  .  . 

Coddington.  —  "I  beseech  you  do  not  speak  so  to 
force  things  along,  for  I  do  not  for  my  own  part  see  any 
equity  in  the  court  in  all  your  proceedings.  Here  is  no  law 
of  God  that  she  hath  broken,  nor  any  law  of  the  country  that 
she  hath  broke,  and  therefore  deserves  no  censure  ;  and  if 
she  say  that  the  elders  preach  as  the  apostles  did,  why  they 
preached  a  covenant  of  grace,  and  what  wrong  is  that  to 
them?  .  .  .  Therefore  I  pray  consider  what  you  do,  for  here 
is  no  law  of  God  or  man  broken." 

Mr.  Peters.  —  "I  confess  I  thought  Mr.  Cotton  would 
never  have  took  her  part." 

Gov.  —  "  The  court  hath  already  declared  themselves  sat- 
isfied .  .  .  concerning  the  troublesomeness  of  her  spirit  and 
the  danger  of  her  course  amongst  us,  which  is  not  to  be  suf- 
fered. Therefore  if  it  be  the  mind  of  the  court  that  Mrs. 
Hutchinsou  .  .  .  shall  be  banished  out  of  our  liberties,  and 
imprisoned  till  she  be  sent  away,  let  them  hold  up  their 
hands." 

All  but  three  consented. 

Gov.  —  "Those  contrary  minded  hold  up  yours." 

Messrs.  Coddington  and  Colburn  only. 

Gov.  —  "Mrs.  Hutchinson,  the  sentence  of  the  court  you 
hear  is  that  you  are  banished  from  out  of  our  jurisdiction  as 
being  a  woman  not  fit  for  our  society,  and  are  to  be  im- 
prisoned till  the  court  shall  send  you  away." 

Mrs.  Hutchinson.  —  "I  desire  to  know  wherefore  I  am 
banished." 

Gov.  —  "  Say  no  more  :  the  court  knows  wherefore,  and 
is  satisfied."60 

00  "  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  72-75. 


THE  INQUISITION  CONTINUES.  619 

Here  the  proceedings  in  the  court  ended.  She  was  com- 
mitted to  Joseph  Welde  of  Roxbury,  whose  brother,  one  of 
the  preachers,  had  pronounced  her  a  Jezebel.  There  the 
preachers  continued  their  tormenting  questioning  and  cross- 
questioning,  until  the  poor  woman  was  driven  so  near  to 
distraction  that  they  with  "sad  hearts"  could  frame  a 
charge  against  her  of  being  possessed  with  Satan.  They 
therefore  wrote  to  the  church  at  Boston  offering  to  make 
proof  of  the  same,  upon  which  she  was  summoned  to  appear 
to  answer  before  the  church. 

When  she  came,  one  of  the  ruling  elders  read  a  list  of 
twenty-nine  "errors,"  of  all  of  which  they  accused  her.  She 
admitted  that  she  had  maintained  all  of  them,  and  then 
asked  a  pointed  question  herself. 

Mrs.  II.  — "  By  what  rule  did  such  an  elder  come 
to  me  pretending  to  desire  light,  and  indeed  to  entrappe 
me?" 

The  elder.  —  "I  came  not  to  entrappe  you,  but  in  com- 
passion to  your  soul." 

The  inquisition  continued  from  eight  o'clock  in  the 
morning  until  eight  o'clock  at  night,  when  sentence  of 
admonition  was  pronounced.  The  case  was  then  adjourned 
for  a  week,  when  she  was  caused  once  more  to  appear  upon 
her  trial,  and  was  charged,  amongst  other  things,  with  having 
denied  "  inherent  righteousness."  Of  course  she  was  con- 
victed upon  all  the  charges,  ' '  so  that  the  church  with  one 
consent  cast  her  out.  .  .  .  After  she  was  excommunicated, 
her  spirit,  which  seemed  before  to  be  somewhat  dejected, 
revived  again,  and  she  gloried  in  her  sufferings." 

"  And  all  this  time  she  had  been  alone  ;  her  friends  were 
far  away.  That  no  circumstance  of  horror  might  be  lost, 
she  and  one  of  her  most  devoted  followers,  Mary  Dyer, 
were  nearing  their  confinements  during  this  time  of  misery. 
Both  cases  ended  in  misfortunes  over  whose  sickening  details 
Thomas  Welde  and  his  reverend  brethren  gloated  with  a 
savage  joy,  declaring  that  '  God  himselfe  was  pleased  to  step 
in  with  his  casting  vote  ...  as  clearly  as  if  he  had  pointed 


620  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

with  his  finger.'  Let  posterity  draw  a  veil  over  the  shock- 
ing scene. "  —  Adains, 61 

Happily  she  escaped  with  her  life.  A  few  days  after 
her  condemnation,  the  governor  sent  her  a  warrant  banishing 
her  from  the  territory  of  Massachusetts.  At  the  solicitation 
of  Roger  Williams,  she  and  her  friends  went  to  Narragan- 
sett  Bay.  Miantonomoh  made  them  a  present  of  the  island 
of  Rhode  Island,  where  they  settled. 

In  1636  about  a  hundred  people,  under  the  leadership  of 
Thomas  Hooker,  a  minister  second  only  to  Cotton  in  the 
estimate  of  the  colonists,  removed  from  Massachusetts  Col- 
ony to  the  valley  of  the  Connecticut,  and  established  there 
the  towns  of  Springfield,  "Windsor,  Hartford,  and  Wethers- 
field  ;  and  January  14,  1639,  Springfield  preferring  to  re- 
main in  the  jurisdiction  of  Massachusetts,  the  three  remaining 
towns  established  a  form  of  government  under  eleven  "fun- 
damental orders,"  the  preamble  of  which  is  as  follows  :  — 

"Forasmuch  as  it  hath  pleased  the  Almighty  God  by  the  wise  dispo- 
sition of  his  divine  providence  so  to  order  and  dispose  of  things  that  we, 
the  inhabitants  and  residents  of  "Windsor,  Hartford,  and  Wethersfield 
are  now  cohabiting  and  dwelling  in  and  upon  the  river  of  Connecticut 
and  the  lands  thereunto  adjoining ;  and  well  knowing  where  a  people 
are  gathered  together,  the  word  of  God  requires  that  to  maintain  the 
peace  and  union  of  such  a  people  there  should  be  an  orderly  and  decent 
government  established  according  to  God,  to  order  and  dispose  of  the 
affairs  of  the  people  at  all  seasons  as  occasion  shall  require  ;  do  there- 
fore associate  and  conjoin  ourselves  to  be  as  one  public  state  or  com- 
monwealth ;  and  do  for  ourselves  and  our  successors  and  such  as  shall 
be  adjoined  to  us  at  any  time  hereafter,  enter  into  combination  and  con- 
federation together,  to  maintain  and  pursue  the  liberty  and  purity  of  the 
gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  which  we  now  profess,  as  also  the  disci- 
pline of  the  churches  which  according  to  the  truth  of  the  said  gospel  is 
now  practiced  amongst  us  ;  as  also  in  our  civil  affairs  to  be  guided  and 
governed  according  to  such  laws,  rules,  orders,  and  decrees  as  shall  be 
made,  ordered,  and  decreed."  62 

Order  number  four  was  to  the  effect  that  the  governor 
should  "be  always  a  member  of  some  approved  congrega- 

61  Id.  6a  Charters  and  Constitutions,  Connecticut. 


PLANTING  OF  CONNECTICUT  AND  NEW  HAVEN.        621 

tion,  and  formerly  of  the  magistracy  within  this  jurisdiction." 
The  oath  of  office  for  the  governor  was  as  follows :  — 

"I,  —  — ,  being  now  chosen  to  be  governor  within  this  jurisdic- 

tion, for  the  year  ensuing,  and  until  a  new  be  chosen,  do  swear  by  the 
great  and  dreadful  name  of  the  overliving  God,  to  promote  the  public 
good  and  peace  of  the  same,  according  to  the  best  of  my  skill  ;  as  also 
will  maintain  all  lawful  privileges  of  this  commonwealth  ;  as  also  that 
all  wholesome  laws  that  are  or  shall  be  made  by  lawful  authority  here 
established,  be  duly  executed  ;  and  will  further  the  execution  of  justice 
according  to  the  rule  of  God's  word  ;  so  help  me  God  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  63 

The  oath  of  the  magistrate  was  substantially  the  same. 
Unlike  Massachusetts,  church  membership  was  not  required 
in  order  to  be  a  voter.  Persons  became  citizens  by  vote  of 
the  major  part  of  the  town  where  they  lived,  or  the  major 
part  of  such  as  should  be  then  present  and  taking  the  l '  oath 
of  fidelity." 

In  1637  a  colony  of  Puritan  immigrants  with  John 
Davenport  as  their  pastor,  arrived  in  Boston,  and  remained 
until  the  spring  of  1638,  then  founded  the  town  and  colony 
of  New  Haven.  In  1639  a  colony  from  New  Haven  settled 
the  town  of  Milford,  and  another  company  from  England 
settled  the  town  of  Guilford.  In  the  same  year  a  form  of 
government  was  established,  and  "by  the  influence  of 
Davenport  it  was  resolved  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  perfect 
rule  of  the  common  wealth  ;  that  the  purity  and  peace  of  the 
ordinances  to  themselves  and  their  posterity  were  the  great 
end  of  civil  order ;  and  that  church  members  only  should  be 
free  burgesses." — Bancroft.^  A  committee  of  twelve  was 
appointed  to  nominate  seven  men  to  become  magistrates. 
In  August  the  seven  met  together  to  put  into  working  order 
the  forms  of  the  new  government.  "  Abrogating  every  pre- 
vious executive  trust,  they  admitted  to  the  court  all  church 

63  id. 

64 "  History  of  the  United  States,"  end  of  chap.  "The  Colonization  of 
Connecticut." 


622  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

members  ;  the  character  of-  civil  magistrates  was  next  ex- 
pounded '  from  the  sacred  oracles  ;  '  and  the  election  fol- 
lowed. Then  Davenport,  in  the  words  of  Moses  to  Israel 
in  the  wilderness,  gave  a  charge  to  the  governor  to  judge 
righteously  ;  'The  cause  that  is  too  hard  for  you,'  such  was 
part  of  the  minister's  text,  '  bring  it  to  me,  and  I  will  hear 
it.'  Annual  elections  were  ordered  ;  and  God's  word  estab- 
lished as  the  only  rule  in  public  affairs."  The  other  towns 
followed  'this  example,  and  thus  "the  power  of  the  clergy 
reached  its  extreme  point  in  New  Haven,  for  each  of  the 
towns  was  governed  by  seven  ecclesiastical  officers  known 
as  'pillars  of  the  church.'  These  magistrates  served  as 
judges,  and  trial  by  jury  was  dispensed  with,  because  no 
authority  could  be  found  for  it  in  the  laws  of  Moses."  — 


In  1643  the  four  colonies  of  Massachusetts,  Plymouth, 
Connecticut,  and  new  Haven  formed  a  league  called  the 
United  Colonies  of  New  England,  the  purpose  of  which 
was  defined  as  follows  :  — 

"  Whereas  wee  all  came  into  these  parts  of  America  with  one  and 
the  same  end  and  ayme  ;  namely,  to  advaunce  the  kingdome  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  and  to  enjoy  the  liberties  of  the  gospell  in  puritie  with 
peace  ;  And,  whereas,  in  our  settleinge  (by  a  wise  Providence  of  God) 
wee  are  further  dispersed  vpon  the  sea  coasts  and  riuers  than  was  at 
first  intended,  so  that  wee  cannot  according  to  our  desire  with  conven- 
ience communicate  in  one  gouernment  and  jurisdiccon,  .  .  .  wee  there- 
fore doe  couceiue  it  our  bounden  dutye  without  delay  to  enter  into  a 
present  consotiation  amongst  our  selucs  for  mutuall  help  and  strength 
in  all  our  future  concernements  :  That  as  in  nation  and  religion  so  in 
other  respects  wee  bee  and  continue  one  according  to  the  tenor  and  true 
meaneing  of  the  ensuing  articles  :  Wherefore  it  is  fully  agreed  and  con- 
cluded by  and  between  the  parties  of  jurisdiccons  aboue  named,  and  they 
jointly  and  seuerally  doe  by  these  presents  agree  and  conclude  that  they 
all  bee  and  henceforth  bee  called  by  the  name  of  The  United  Colonies  of 
New  England. 

"  1.  The  said  United  Colonies  for  themselves  and  their  posterities  do 
joyntly  and  seuerally  hereby  enter  into  a  firme  and  perpetuall  league  of 

65  "  Beginnings  of  New  England,"  p.  136. 


THE  THEOCRACY  IS  COMPLETED. 

friendship  and  amytie  for  offence  and  defence,  mutnall  advise,  and  suc- 
cour vpon  all  just  occasions  both  for  preserueing  and  propagateing  the 
truth  and  liberties  of  the  gospell  and  for  their  owne  mutuall  safety  and 
wellfare.  .  .  . 

"6.  It  is  also  agreed  that  for  the  managing  and  concluding  of  all  af- 
faires proper  and  concerning  the  whole  Confederacon  two  commissioners 
shall  be  chosen  by  and  out  of  eich  of  these  foure  jurisdiccons  ;  namely, 
two  for  the  Massachusetts,  two  for  Plymouth,  two  for  Connectacutt,  and 
two  for  New  Haven,  being  all  in.  church  fellowship  with  us  which  shall 
bring  full  power  from  their  seueral  generall  courts  respectively  to  heare 
examine,  weigh,  and  determine  all  affaires,"  etc. 6G 

The  population  of  the  four  colonies  was  about  twenty-' 
four  thousand,  Massachusetts  having  about  fifteen  thousand, 
and  the  other  three  colonies  about  three  thousand  each. 
The  Federal  Commissioners  formed  an  advisory  board  rather 
than  a  legislative  body.  The  formation  of  this  league 
strengthened  the  theocracy. 

By  the  strictness  of  the  rules  which  had  been  framed  by 
the  preachers  to  regulate  the  admission  of  members  to  the 
churches,  there  were  so  few  that  joined  the  churches,  that 
the  membership,  which  was  supposed  to  include  at  least  the 
great  majority  of  the  people,  in  fact  embraced  not  more  than 
one  third  of  them.  And  now  as  a  demand  began  to  be  made 
for  freedom  of  worship  according  to  other  than  Congrega- 
tional forms,  the  Congregational  clergy  saw  that  something 
must  be  done  more  firmly  to  confirm  their  power. 

Accordingly  at  Cambridge,  August,  1648,  after  two  years' 
reflection,  there  was  framed  a  "Platform  of  Church  Disci- 
pline Gathered  out  of  the  Word  of  God."  It  was  in  fact  the 
establishment  of  the  Congregational  Church  upon  the  basis  of 
the  confederacy  of  the  four  colonies  ;  for  throughout,  although 
it  professed  to  maintain  the  principles  of  the  independence  of 
each  congregation,  it  provided  "  councils  composed  of  elders, 
and  other  messengers  of  churches  to  advise,  to  admonish, 
and  to  withhold  fellowship  from  a  church,"  but  not  to  ex- 
ercise special  acts  of  discipline,  or  jurisdiction,  in  any  par- 

66  "National  Reform  Manual,"  1890,  pp.  223,  224. 


624  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

ticular  church.  And  further  it  provided  that  if  any  church 
should  separate  itself  from  the  communion  of  the  churches, 
the  magistrates  might  compel  them  to  conform.  "The 
Westminster  Confession  was  promulgated  as  the  creed  ;  the 
powers  of  the  clergy  were  minutely  defined,  and  the  duty  of 
the  laity  stated  to  be  '  obeying  their  elders  and  submitting 
themselves  unto  them  in  the  Lord.'  The  magistrate  was  en- 
joined to  punish  'idolatry,  blasphemy,  heresy,'  and  to  coerce 
any  church  becoming  '  schismatical.' '  —Adams." 

In  October,  1649,  the  platform  was  referred  to  the  gen- 
eral court  for  consideration  and  adopted,  and  was  further 
submitted  by  them  to  the  churches  for  their  approval.  In 
October,  1651,  it  was  confirmed  by  each  of  the  legislatures. 
Thus  was  the  theocracy  of  Massachusetts  completed  and 
clothed  with  all  the  power  of  the  commonwealth.  And  as 
its  power  was  increased,  so  were  its  bitter  fruits  vastly  in- 
creased. In  1649  Governor  Winthrop  died,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  John  Endicott  ;  and  in  1652  John  Cotton  died, 
and  was  succeeded  by  John  lSrorton,  and  these  two  men,  John 
Endicott  and  John  Norton,  have  been  not  inaptly  described 
as  "two  as  arrant  fanatics  as  ever  drew  breath."  And  with 
the  accession  of  these  two  men  to  the  headship  of  the  com- 
plete and  fully  furnished  theocracy,  the  New  England  reign 
of  terror  may  be  said  to  have  begun. 

THE    SUFFERINGS    OF    THE    BAPTISTS. 

Of  all  the  pests  which  so  far  the  New  England  Puritans 
dreaded  and  hated,  the  Baptists  or,  as  they  were  nicknamed, 
"the  Anabaptists,"  were  the  greatest.  It  was  not  one  of  the 
least  of  the  offenses  of  Roger  Williams  that  he  was  a  Baptist. 
Not  long  after  Roger  Williams's  banishment,  that  Thomas 
Shepard  of  Charlestown  in  the  sermon  before  referred  to 
entitled  "Eye  Salve,"  had  told  the  governor  and  the  magis- 
trates that  ' '  Anabaptists  have  ever  been  looked  at  by  the 
godly  leaders  of  this  people  as  a  scab  ;  "  and  the  president 

67  "Emancipation  of  Massachussets,"  p.  98. 


LAWS  AGAINST  TUB  BAPTISTS.  625 

of  Harvard  College  said  that  ' '  such  a  rough  thing  as  a  New 
England  Anabaptist  is  not  to  be  handled  over  tenderly." 
According  to  these  principles,  therefore,  the  general  court 
of  Massachusetts  in  1644  — 

"  Ordered  and  agreed  that  if  any  person  or  persons,  within  this  juris- 
diction, shall  either  openly  condemn  or  oppose  the  baptizing  of  infants, 
or  go  about  secretly  to  seduce  others  from  the  approbation  or  use 
thereof,  or  shall  purposely  depart  the  congregation  at  the  ministration 
of  the  ordinance,  or  shall  deny  the  ordinance  of  magistracy,  or  their 
lawful  right  and  authority  to  make  war,  or  to  punish  the  outward 
breaches  of  the  first  table,  and  shall  appear  to  the  court  willfully  and 
obstinately  to  continue  therein,  after  due  time  and  means  of  conviction, 
every  such  person  or  persons  shall  be  sentenced  to  banishment."68 

The  next  year,  however,  a  strong  petition  was  presented 
for  the  repeal  of  the  law  because  of  the  offense  that  had 
been  "taken  thereat  by  the  godly  in  England,  'but  many 
of  the  elders  entreated  that  the  law  might  continue  still  in 
force."  The  law  remained,  but  the  representative  of  the 
colony  who  went  to  England  in  1646  explained  to  Parlia- 


68  Id.,  p.  105.  Under  the  year  1649,  Hildreth  gives  the  copy  of  a  law  em- 
bodying the  provisions  cited  above,  with  other  important  points.  It  seems  to  be 
the  same  law,  but  if  it  really  belongs  under  1649,  it  must  be  a  re-enactment  with 
additions.  It  runs  thus:  "'  Although  no  human  power  be  lord  over  the  faith 
and  consciences  of  men,  yet  because  such  as  bring  in  damnable  heresies,  tending 
to  the  subversion  of  the  Christian  faith  and  destruction  of  the  souls  of  men, 
ought  duly  to  be  restrained  from  such  notorious  impieties,'  therefore  '  any  Chris- 
tian within  this  jurisdiction  who  shall  go  about  to  subvert  or  destroy  the  Chris- 
tian faith  or  religion  by  broaching  and  maintaining  any  damnable  heresies,  as 
denying  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  or  resurrection  of  the  body,  or  any  sin  to  be 
repented  of  in  the  regenerate,  or  any  evil  done  by  the  outward  man  to  be  ac- 
counted sin,  or  denying  that  Christ  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  our  sins,  or  shall 
affirm  that  we  are  not  justified  by  his  death  and  righteousness,  but  by  the  per- 
fection of  our  own  works,  or  shall  deny  the  morality  of  the  fourth  commandment, 
or  shall  openly  condemn  or  oppose  the  baptizing  of  infants,  or  shall  purposely 
depart  the  congregation  at  the  administration  of  that  ordinance,  or  shall  deny 
the  ordinance  of  magistracy,  or  their  lawful  authority  to  make  war,  or  to  punish 
the  outward  breaches  of  the  first  table,  or  shall  endeavor  to  seduce  others  to  any 
of  the  eiTors  and  heresies  above  mentioned  ; '  —  any  such  were  liable  to  banish- 
ment." —  "  History  of  the  United  States,"  Vol.  i,  chap,  xii,  par.  1,  2. 


626  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  ^AND  FALSE. 

nient  that  "'tis  true  we  have  a  severe  law,  but  wee  never 
did  or  will  execute  the  rigor  of  it  upon  any.  .  .  .  But  the 
reason  wherefore  wee  are  loath  either  to  repeale  or  alter  the 
law  is  because  wee  would  have  it  ...  to  beare  witnesse 
against  their  judgment,  .  .  .  which  we  conceive  ...  to 
bee  erroneous."  In  pursuance  of  this  law  and  in  the  same 
year,  a  Baptist  by  the  name  of  Painter,  for  refusing  to  let 
his  child  be  sprinkled,  "was  brought  before  the  court, 
where  he  declared  their  baptism  to  be  antichristian."  He 
was  sentenced  to  be  whipped,  which  he  bore  without 
flinching. 

And  now  in  1651  three  Baptist  ministers,  John  Clarke, 
Obadiah  Holmes,  arid  John  Crandall,  went  from  the  Provi- 
dence plantation  to  Lynn,  Massachusetts,  to  visit  an  aged 
Baptist.  They  arrived  on  Saturday,  July  19,  and  the  next 
day  they  worshiped  together  in  his  private  house.  While 
Mr.  Clarke  was  preaching,  two  constables  entered  the  house 
with  a  warrant  to  arrest  "certain  erroneous  persons  being 
strangers."  The  three  ministers  were  carried  off  at  once  to 
the  tavern,  and  were  notified  that  they  must  attend  worship 
at  the  parish  church  in  the  afternoon.  They  protested,  say- 
ing that  if  they  were  forced  into  the  meeting-house,  they 
should  be  obliged  to  dissent  from  the  service.  The  con- 
stable told  them  that  was  nothing  to  him.  He  was  ordered 
to  bring  them  to  church,  and  to  church  they  must  go.  As 
they  entered  the  meeting-house,  the  congregation  was  at 
prayers,  and  the  three  prisoners  took  off  their  hats  ;  but  as 
soon  as  the  prayer  was  over,  they  put  on  their  hats  again, 
and  began  reading  in  their  seats.  The  officers  were  ordered 
to  take  off  their  hats  again. 

When  the  service  \vas  over,  Elder  Clarke  asked  permis- 
sion to  speak.  His  request  was  granted  on  condition  that  he 
would  not  speak  about  what  he  had  just  heard  preached. 
He  began  to  explain  why  he  had  put  on  his  hat,  saying  that 
he  "  could  not  judge  that  they  were  gathered  according  to 
the  visible  order  of  the  Lord."  He  was  allowed  to  proceed 


THE  BAPTIST  PRINCIPLES.  627 

no  further,  and  the  three  were  shut  up  for  the  night.  The 
following  Tuesday  they  were  taken  to  Boston  and  put  in 
prison.  July  31,  they  were  tried  before  the  court  of  assist- 
ants, and  were  fined,  Clarke  twenty  pounds,  Holmes  thirty, 
and  John  Crandall  five,  "  or  each  to  be  well  whipped."  At 
the  beginning  of  the  trial  Elder  Clarke  had  asked  that  they 
be  shown  the  law  under  which  they  were  being  tried,  and 
now  he  made  the  same  request  again,  but  Endicott  broke  in, 
"You  have  deserved  death.  I  will  not  have  sucli  trash 
brought  into  our  jurisdiction.  You  go  up  and  down,  and 
secretly  insinuate  things  into  those  that  are  weak,  but  you 
cannot  maintain  it  before  our  ministers  ;  you  may  try  a  dis- 
pute with  them." 

As  they  were  sent  away  from  the  court  to  prison, 
Elder  Holmes  says,  "As  I  went  from  the  bar,  I  exprest 
myself  in  these  words  :  '  I  blesse  God  I  am  counted  worthy 
to  suffer  for  the  name  of  Jesus ; '  whereupon  John  Wilson 
(their  pastor,  as  they  call  him)  strook  me  before  the  judge- 
ment-seat, and  cursed  me,  saying,  '  The  curse  of  God  .  .  . 
goe  with  thee  ; '  so  we  were  carried  to  the  prison." 

The  Baptists  were  ready  to  defend  their  doctrines  as  well  as 
to  attack  the  popish  ceremonies  of  the  Puritans  ;  therefore 
Elder  Clarke,  as  soon  as  they  had  arrived  at  the  prison, 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  court,  and  proposed  to  debate  the 
Baptist  principles  with  any  of  their  ministers.  He  was 
asked  in  reply  what  the  Baptist  principles  were  that  he 
would  debate.  Clarke  drew  up  four  propositions,  the  first 
stating  their  faith  in  Christ ;  second,  that  baptism,  or  dip- 
ping in  water,  is  one  of  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  that  a  visible  believer  or  disciple  of  Christ 
Jesus  (that  is,  one  who  manifests  repentance  toward  and 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ)  is  the  only  person  to  be  baptized  or 
dipped  in  water,  etc. ;  third,  that  every  such  believer  in 
Christ  may  in  point  of  liberty,  and  ought  in  point  of  duty, 
to  improve  that  talent  which  the  Lord  had  given  him,  and  in 
the  congregation  may  ask  for  information  to  himself ;  or  if 


628  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

he  can,  may  speak  by  way  of  prophecy,  for  edification,  and 
upon  all  occasions  and  in  all  places  as  far  as  the  jurisdiction 
of  his  Lord  extends,  may  and  ought  to  walk  as  a  child  of 
light ;  and,  fourth,  "I  testify  that  no  such  believer  or  serv- 
ant of  Christ  Jesus  hath  any  liberty,  much  less  authority, 
from  his  Lord,  to  smite  his  fellow-servant,  nor  with  outward 
force,  or  arm  of  flesh  to  constrain,  or  restrain,  his  con- 
science, nor  his  outward  man  for  conscience'  sake,  or 
worship  of  his  God,  where  injury  is  not  offered  to  any 
person,  name,  or  estate  of  others,  every  man  being  such  as 
shall  appear  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ,  and  must 
give  an  account  of  himself  to  God  ;  and,  therefore,  ought  to 
be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own  mind  for  what  he  undertakes, 
because  he  that  doubteth  is  damned  if  he  eat,  and  so  also 
if  he  act,  because  he  doth  not  eat  or  act  in  faith,  and  what 
is  not  of  faith  is  sin." 

There  was  at  first  some  talk,  or  rather  a  bluff,  that 
Cotton  would  debate  with  him ;  but  after  consulting  to- 
gether, Cotton  declined,  and  as  Elder  Clarke's  fine  had  been 
paid  by  his  friends,  he  was  released,  and  ordered  to  go  out 
of  the  colony  as  soon  as  possible.  They  all  three  refused  to 
pay  the  fine  that  was  imposed.  Crandall  was  admitted  to 
bail,  but  they  resolved  to  hold  Elder  Holmes,  and  make 
him  an  example.  What  happened  to  him  he  himself  tells 
in  a  letter  to  his  brethren  in  London,  as  follows  :  — 

"I  desired  to  speak  a  few  words  :  but  Mr.  Nowel  answered,  'It  is 
not  now  a  time  to  speak/  whereupon  I  took  leave,  and  said,  'Men, 
brethren,  fathers,  and  countrymen,  I  beseech  you  to  give  me  leave  to 
speak  a  few  words,  and  the  rather  because  here  are  many  spectators  to 
see  me  punished,  and  I  am  to  seal  with  my  blood,  if  God  give  strength, 
that  which  I  hold  and  practice  in  reference  to  the  word  of  God  and  the 
testimony  of  Jesus.  That  which  I  have  to  say,  in  brief,  is  this  :  although 
I  am  no  disputant,  yet  seeing  I  am  to  seal  with  my  blood  what  I  hold, 
I  am  ready  to  defend  by  the  word,  and  to  dispute  that  point  with  any 
that  shall  come  forth  to  withstand  it.'  Mr.  Nowel  answered,  now  was 
no  time  to  dispute  ;  then  said  I,  '  I  desire  to  give  an  account  of  the  faith 
and  order  which  I  hold,'  and  this  I  desired  three  times ;  but  in  comes 


THE   WHIPPING   OF  ELDER  HOLMES.  629 

Mr.  Flint,  and  saith  to  the  executioner,  'Fellow,  do  thine  office,  for  this 
fellow  would  but  make  a  long  speech  to  delude  the  people,'  so  I,  being 
resolved  to  speak,  told  the  people,  '  That  which  I  am  to  suffer  for  is  the 
word  of  God,  and  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ.'  'No,'  saith  Mr.  Nowel, 
'  it  is  for  your  error,  and  going  about  to  seduce  the  people  ; '  to  which  I 
replied,  'Not  for  error,  for  in  all  the  time  of  my  imprisonment,  wherein 
I  was  left  alone,  my  brethren  being  gone,  which  of  all  your  ministers 
came  to  convince  me  of  error  ?  And,  when  upon  the  governor's  words, 
a  motion  was  made  for  a  public  dispute,  and  often  renewed  upon  fair 
terms,  and  desired  by  hundreds,  what  was  the  reason  it  was  not 
granted?'  Mr.  Nowel  told  me,  it  was  his  fault  who  went  away  and 
would  not  dispute  ;  but  this  the  writings  will  clear  at  large.  Still  Mr.  Flint 
calls  to  the  man  to  do  his  office  ;  so  before,  and  in  the  time  of  his  pull- 
ing off  my  clothes,  I  continued  speaking,  telling  them  that  I  had  so 
learned  that  for  all  Boston  I  would  not  give  my  body  into  their 
hands  thus  to  be  bruised  upon  another  account,  yet  upon  this  I  would 
not  give  an  hundredth  part  of  a  wampum  peague  to  free  it  out  of  their 
hands  ;  and  that  I  made  as  much  conscience  of  unbuttoning  one  button, 
as  I  did  of  paying  the  thirty  pounds  in  reference  thereunto.  I  told 
them,  moreover,  that  the  Lord  having  manifested  his  love  towards  me» 
in  giving  me  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  in  Christ,  and  so  to  be 
baptized  in  water  by  a  messenger  of  Jesus,  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  wherein  I  have  fellowship  with  him  in  his  death, 
burial,  and  resurrection,  I  am  now  come  to  be  baptized  in  afflictions  by 
your  hands,  that  so  I  may  have  further  fellowship  with  my  Lord,  and 
am  not  ashamed  of  his  sufferings,  for  by  his  stripes  am  I  healed.  And 
as  the  man  began  to  lay  the  strokes  upon  my  back,  I  said  to  the  people, 
'Though  my  flesh  should  fail,  and  my  spirit  should  fail,  yet  God  would 
not  fail ; '  so  it  pleased  the  Lord  to  come  in,  and  to  fill  my  heart  and 
tongue  as  a  vessel  full,  and  with  an  audible  voice  I  break  forth,  praying 
the  Lord  not  to  lay  this  sin  to  their  charge,  and  telling  the  people  that 
now  I  found  he  did  not  fail  me,  and  therefore  now  I  should  trust  him 
forever  who  failed  me  not ;  for  in  truth,  as  the  strokes  fell  upon  me,  I 
had  such  a  spiritual  manifestation  of  God's  presence,  as  I  never  had 
before,  and  the  outward  pain  was  so  removed  from  me,  that  I  could  well 
bear  it,  yea,  and  in  a  manner  felt  it  not,  although  it  was  grievous,  as  the 
spectators  said,  the  man  striking  with  all  his  strength,  spitting  in  his 
hand  three  times,  with  a  three-corded  whip,  giving  me  therewith  thirty 
strokes.  When  he  had  loosed  me  from  the  post,  having  joyfulness  in 
my  heart,  and  cheerfulness  in  my  countenance,  as  the  spectators  ob- 
served, I  told  the  magistrates,  'You  have  struck  me  with  roses;'  and 
said,  moreover,  'Although  the  Lord  hath  made  it  easy  to  me,  yet  I  pray 
God  it  may  not  be  laid  to  your  charge."' 
48 


630  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

When  the  whipping  was  over,  two  men,  John  Hazel  and 
John  Spur,  went  up  to  the  suffering  man,  and  shook  hands 
with  him,  Hazel  not  speaking  anything  at  all,  and  Spur 
simply  saying,  "  Blessed  be  the  Lord  ;  "  yet  both  were  fined 
forty  shillings,  with  the  choice  of  paying  the  fine  or  being 
whipped.  They  both  refused  to  pay  the  fine,  but  a  friend 
paid  Spur's,  and  after  imprisonment  for  a  week,  another 
paid  Hazel's.  The  whipping  of  Holmes  was  thirty  lashes 
with  a  three-thonged  whip  of  knotted  cord  wielded  with  both 
hands,  and  was  so  severe  that  when  taken  back  to  prison, 
his  lacerated  body  could  not  bear  to  touch  the  bed.  For 
many  days  he  was  compelled  to  rest  propped  up  on  his 
hands  and  knees.  In  prison  an  old  acquaintance  came 
"with  much  tenderness  like  the  good  Samaritan,"  to  comfort 
him  and  dress  his  wounds,  and  even  against  him  informa- 
tion was  given,  and  inquiry  made  as  to  who  was  the  surgeon. 
When  Elder  Holmes's  letter  reached  his  friends  in  London, 
they  published  it,  upon  which  Sir  Richard  Saltonstall  wrote 
to  the  Boston  preachers  the  following  letter  :  — 

"Reverend  and  dear  friends,  whom  I  unfeignedly  love  and  respect  : 
It  doth,  not  a  little  grieve  my  spirit  to  hear  what  sad  things  are  re- 
ported daily  of  your  tyranny  and  persecution  in  New  England  ;  that  you 
fine,  whip,  and  imprison  men  for  their  consciences.  •  First,  you  compel 
such  to  come  into  your  assemblies  as  you  know  will  not  join  with  you  in 
worship,  and  when  they  show  their  dislike  thereof,  or  witness  against 
it,  then  you  stir  up  your  magistrates  to  punish  them  for  such  (as  you 
conceive)  their  public  affronts.  Truly,  friends,  this  practice  of  com- 
pelling any  in  matters  of  worship  to  do  that  whereof  they  are  not  fully 
persuaded,  is  to  make  them  sin,  for  so  the  apostle  tells  us  (Rom.  xiv,  23)  ; 
and  many  are  made  hypocrites  thereby,  conforming  in  their  outward 
man  for  fear  of  punishment.  We  pray  for  you  and  wish  your  prosperity 
every  way  ;  hoped  the  Lord  would  have  given  you  so  much  light  and 
love  there,  that  you  might  have  been  eyes  to  God's  people  here,  and  not 
to  practice  those  courses  in  a' wilderness,  which  you  went  so  far  to  pre- 
vent. These  rigid  ways  have  laid  you  very  low  in  the  hearts  of  the 
saints.  I  do  assure  you  I  have  heard  them  pray  in  public  assemblies, 
that  the  Lord  would  give  you  meek  and  humble  spirits,  not  to  strive  so 
much  for  uniformity  as  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of 
peace.  When  I  was  in  Holland,  about  the  beginning  of  our  wars,  I 


THE  PERSECUTORS  JUSTIFY   THEMSELVES.         631 

remember  some  Christians  there,  that  then  had  serious  thoughts  of 
planting  in  New  England,  desired  me  to  write  to  the  governor  thereof, 
to  know  if  those  that  differ  from  you  in  opinion,  yet  holding  the  same 
foundation  in  religion,  as  Anabaptists,  Seekers.  Antinomians,  and  the  like, 
might  be  permitted  to  live  among  you  ;  to  which  I  received  this  short 
answer  from  your  then  governor,  Mr.  Dudley:  'God  forbid,'  said  he, 
'  our  love  for  the  truth  should  be  grown  so  cold  that  we  should  tolerate 
errors.' 

It  is  important  to  know  what  answer  was  made  to  this, 
and  to  know  the  arguments  that  were  used  by  the  New  En- 
gland theocracy  to  justify  these  wicked  persecutions.  The 
preachers  answered  Sir  liichard's  letter,  by  the  hand  of  their 
chief,  John  Cotton.  And  the  letter  runs  as  follows  :  — 

"Honored  and  dear  Sir  :  My  Brother  Wilson  and  self  do  both  of  us 
acknowledge  your  love,  as  otherwise  formerly,  so  now  in  late  lines  we 
received  from  you,  that  you  grieve  in  spirit  to  hear  daily  complaints 
against  us  ;  it  springeth  from  your  compassion  for  our  afflictions  therein, 
wherein  we  see  just  cause  to  desire  you  may  never  suffer  like  injury  in 
yourself,  but  may  find  others  to  compassionate  and  condole  with  you. 
For  when  the  complaints  you  hear  of  are  against  our  tyranny  and  perse- 
cution in  fining,  whipping,  and  imprisoning  men  for  their  consciences, 
be  pleased  to  understand  we  look  at  such  complaints  as  altogether  injuri- 
ous in  respect  of  ourselves,  who  had  no  hand  or  tongue  at  all  to  promote 
either  the  coming  of  the  persons  you  aim  at  into  our  assemblies,  or  their 
punishment  for  their  carriage  there.  Righteous  judgments  will  not  take 
up  reports,  much  less  reproaches  against  the  innocent.  The  cry  of  the 
sins  of  Sodom  was  great  amMoud,  and  reached  unto  heaven  ;  yet  the 
righteous  God  (giving  us  an  example  what  to  do  in  the  like  case)  he 
would  first  go  down  to  see  whether  their  crimes  were  altogether  ac- 
cording to  the  cry,  before  he  would  proceed  to  judgment.  Gen.  xviii, 
20,  21.  And  when  he  did  find  the  truth  of  the  cry,  he  did  not  wrap  up 
all  alike  promiscuously  in  the  judgment,  but  spared  such  as  he  found 
innocent.  We  are  amongst  those  (if  you  knew  us  better)  you  would  ac- 
count of  as  (as  the  matron  of  Abel  spake  of  herself)  peaceable  in  Israel. 
2  Sam.  xx,  19.  Yet  neither  are  we  so  vast  in  our  indulgence  or  tolera- 
tion as  to  think  the  men  you  speak  of  suffered  an  unjust  censure.  For 
one  of  them,  Obadiah  Holmes,  being  an  excommunicate  person  himself, 
out  of  a  church  in  Plymouth  patent,  came  into  this  jurisdiction,  and 
took  upon  him  to  baptize,  which  I  think  himself  will  not  say  he  was 
compelled  here  to  perform.  And  he  was  not  ignorant  that  the  rebaptiz- 


632  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

ing  of  an  elder  person,  and  that  by  a  private  person  out  of  office  and 
under  excommunication,  are  all  of  them  manifest  contestations  against 
the  order  and  government  of  oiw  churches,  established,  we  know,  by 
God's  law,  and  he  knoweth  by  the  laws  of  the  country.  And  we  con- 
ceive we  may  safely  appeal  to  the  ingenuity  of  your  own  judgment, 
whether  it  would  be  tolerated  in  any  civil  state,  for  a  stranger  to  come 
and  practise  contrary  to  the  known  principles  of  the  church  estate  ?  As 
for  his  whipping,  it  was  more  voluntarily  chosen  by  him  than  inflicted 
on  him.  His  censure  by  the  court  was  to  have  paid,  as  I  know,  thirty 
pounds,  or  else  to  be  whipt  :  his  fine  was  offered  to  be  paid  by  friends 
for  him  freely  ;  but  he  chose  rather  to  be  whipt  ;  in  which  case,  if  his 
sufferings  of  stripes  was  any  worship  of  God  at  all,  surely  it  could  be 
accounted  no  better  than  will  worship.  The  other,  Mr.  Clarke,  was 
wiser  in  that  point,  and  his  offense  was  less,  so  was  his  fine  less,  and 
himself,  as  I  hear,  was  contented  to  have  it  paid  for  him,  whereupon  he 
was  released.  The  imprisonment  of  either  of  them  was  no  detriment. 

1  believe  they  fared  neither  of  them  better  at  home  ;    and  I  am  sure 
Holmes  had  not  been  so  well  clad  for  years  before. 

"  But  be  pleased  to  consider  this  point  a  little  further  :  You  think  to 
compel  men  in  matter  of  worship  is  to  make  them  sin,  according  to 
Rom.  xiv,  23.  If  the  worship  be  lawful  in  itself,  the  magistrate  com- 
pelling to  come  to  it,  compelleth  him  not  to  sin,  but  the  sin  is  in  his 
will  that  needs  to  be  compelled  to  a  Christian  duty.  Josiah  compelled 
all  Israel,  or,  which  is  all  one,  made  to  serve  the  Lord  their  God. 

2  Chron.  xxxiv,  33.     Yet  his  act  herein  was  not  blamed,  but  recorded 
among  his  virtuous  actions.     For  a  governor  to  suffer  any  within  his 
gates  to  profane  the  Sabbath,  is  a  sin  against  the  fourth  commandment, 
both  in  the  private  householder  and  in  the  magistrate  ;  and  if  he  requires 
them  to  present  themselves  before  the  Lord,  the  magistrate  sinneth  not, 
nor  doth  the  subject  sin  so  great  a  sin  as  if  he  did  refrain  to  come.     But 
you  say  it  doth  but  make  men  hypocrites,  to  compel  men  to  conform  the 
outward  man  for  fear  of  punishment.     If  it  did  so,  yet  better  be  hypo- 
crites than  profane  persons.     Hypocrites  give  God  part  of  his  due,  the 
outward  man  ;  but  the  profane  person  giveth  God  neither  outward  nor 
inward  man.     Nevertheless,  I  tell  you  the  truth,  we  have  tolerated  in 
our  church  some  Anabaptists,  some  Antinomians,  and  some  Seekers,  and 
do  so  still  at  this  day.69" 

In  1655  Thomas  Gould  of  Charlestown  refused  to  have 
his  baby  sprinkled  and  christened.  The  regular  preacher 
ordered  the  church  "to  lay  him  under  admonition,  which 
the  church  was  backward  to  do.1'  Not  long  afterward  he 

69Backus's  "Church  History  of  New  England,"  pp.  75-81. 


THOMAS   GOULD  AND  HIS  BRETHREN.  C33 

was  at  church  as  the  law  required  him  to  be,  and  when  the 
time  of  sprinkling  the  children  came,  he  went  out.  He  was 
spoken  to  about  it,  but  told  them  he  could  not  stay  because 
he  "lookt  upon  it  as  no  ordinance  of  Christ.  They  told 
me  that  now  I  had  made  known  my  judgment,  I  might  stay. 
.  .  .  So  I  stayed,  and  sat  down  in  my  seat,  when  they 
were  at  prayer  and  administering  the  service  to  infants. 
Then  they  dealt  with  me  for  my  unreverent  carriage." 
Their  dealing  with  him  was  to  admonish  him  and  exclude 
him  from  the  communion. 

In  October,  1656,  he  was  accused  before  the  county  court 
for  denying  baptism  to  his  child.  Of  course  he  was  con- 
victed. He  was  admonished  and  given  till  the  next  term  to 
consider  his  ways.  During  this  time  they  made  it  so  un- 
pleasant for  him  that  he  ceased  attending  the  church  at 
Charlestown,  and  went  to  church  at  Cambridge  instead.  But 
this,  being  an  apparent  slight  upon  the  minister,  was  only  a 
new  offense.  Although  not  actually  punished,  he  was  sub- 
jected to  petty  annoyances,  being  again  and  again  summoned 
both  to  the  church  and  to  the  court  to  be  admonished,  until 
in  May  28,  1665,  he  withdrew  entirely  from  the  Congrega- 
tional Church,  and  with  eight  others  formed  a  Baptist  church. 
This  being  "  schismatical,"  was  counted  as  open  rebellion, 
and  Gould  and  his  brethren  were  summoned  to  appear  be- 
fore the  church  the  next  Sunday.  They  told  the  magistrates 
that  they  could  not  go  at  that  time,  but  the  following  Sunday 
they  would  be  there  ;  but  the  minister  refused  to  wait,  and 
in  his  sermon  "laid  out  the  sins  of  these  men,  and  delivered 
them  up  to  Satan." 

They  were  called  before  one  court  after  another,  until 
their  case  reached  the  general  court  in  October.  Those 
among  them  who  were  freeman  were  disfranchised,  and  if 
they  should  be  convicted  again  of  continued  schism,  were  to 
be  imprisoned  until  further  order.  In  April,  1666,  they  were 
fined  four  pounds,  and  were  imprisoned  until  September, 
when  they  were  ordered  to  be  discharged  upon  payment  of 


PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

fines  and  costs.  In  April,  1068,  they  were  ordered  by  the 
governor  and  council  to  appear  at  the  meeting-house  at  nine 
o'clock  on  the  morning  of  April  1-i,  to  meet  six  ministers 
who  would  debate  with  them.  The  debate,  however,  did  not 
amount  to  much  except  that  it  gave  to  the  ministers  an  op- 
portunity to  denounce  the  Baptists  as  they  wished.  The 
Baptists,  asking  for  liberty  to  speak,  were  told  that  they 
stood  there  as  delinquents,  and  ought  not  to  have  liberty  to 
speak.  Two  days  were  spent  in  this  way,  when  at  the  end 
of  the  second  day,  "Rev."  Jonathan  Mitchell  pronounced 
the  following  sentence  from  Deut.  xvii,  9-12  :  - 

"  And  thou  shall  come  unto  the  priests  and  the  Levites,  and  unto  the 
judge  that  shall  be  in  those  days,  and  inquire  ;  and  they  shall  show  thee 
the  sentence  of  judgment  :  And  thou  shalt  do  according  to  the  sen- 
tence, which  they  of  that  place  which  the  Lord  shall  choose,  shall  show 
thee  ;  and  thou  shalt  observe  to  do  according  to  all  that  they  inform 
thee.  According  to  the  sentence  of  the  law  which  they  shall  teach  thee, 
and  according  to  the  judgment  which  they  shall  tell  thee,  thou  shalt 
do  ;  thou  shalt  not  decline  from  the  sentence  which  they  shall  show 
thee,  to  the  right  hand  nor  to  the  left.  And  the  man  that  will  do  pre- 
sumptuously, and  will  not  hearken  unto  the  priest  that  standeth  to  minis- 
ter there  before  the  Lord  thy  God,  or  unto  the  judge,  even  that  man 
shall  die  ;  and  thou  shalt  put  away  evil  from  Israel." 

May  27,  Gould  and  two  of  his  brethern  as  "  obstinate  and 
turbulent  Anabaptists,"  were  banished  under  penalty  of 
perpetual  imprisonment.  They  remained.  Accordingly 
they  were  imprisoned.  By  this  persecution  much  sympathy 
was  awakened  in  the  community,  and  a  petition  in  their 
behalf  was  signed  by  sixty-six  of  the  inhabitants  of  Charles- 
town,  among  whom  were  some  of  the  most  prominent  citi- 
zens. The  petition  was  to  the  legislature,  and  prayed  for 
mercy  upon  the  prisoners,  saying,  "  They  be  aged  and  weakly 
men  ;  .  .  .  the  sense  of  this  their  .  .  .  most  deplorable  and 
afflicted  condition  hath  sadly  affected  the  hearts  of  many  .  .  . 
Christians,  and  such  as  neither  approve  of  their  judgment  or 
practice ;  especially  considering  that  the  men  are  reputed 
godly,  and  of  a  blameless  conversation.  .  .  .  We  therefore 
most  humbly  beseech  this  honored  court,  in  their  Christian 


ANOTHER  REMONSTRANCE  FROM  ENGLAND.        635 

mercy  and  bowels  of  compassion,  to  pity  and  relieve  these 
poor  prisoners."  70  The  petition  was  by  vote  declared  scan- 
dalous and  reproachful.  The  two  persons  who  had  taken  the 
lead  in  getting  it  up,  were  fined,  one  ten  and  the  other  five 
pounds,  and  all  the  others  who  had  signed  the  petition  were 
compelled  to  sign  a  document  expressing  their  sorrow  for 
giving  the  court  such  just  grounds  of  offense. 

Report  of  these  proceedings  having  reached  England, 
thirteen  of  the  Congregational  ministers  wrote,  by  the  hand  of 
Robert  Mascall,  a  letter  to  their  brethren  in  New  England,  in 
which  they  said  :  — 

"O,  how  it  grieves  and  affects  us,  that  New  England  should  perse- 
cute !  Will  you  not  give  what  you  take  ?  Is  liberty  of  conscience  your 
due  ?  And  is  it  not  as  due  unto  others  who  are  sound  in  the  faith  ? 
Amongst  many  Scriptures,  that  in  the  fourteenth  of  Romans  much  con- 
firms me  in  liberty  of  conscience  thus  stated.  To  him  that  esteemeth  any- 
thing unclean,  to  him  it  is  unclean.  Therefore  though  we  approve  of 
the  baptism  of  the  immediate  children  of  church  members,  and  of  their 
admission  into  the  church  when  they  evidence  a  real  work  of  grace,  yet 
to  those  who  in  conscience  believe  the  said  baptism  to  be  unclean,  it  is 
unclean.  Both  that  and  mere  ruling  elders,  though  we  approve  of  them, 
yet  our  grounds  are  mere  interpretations  of,  and  not  any  express  script- 
ure. I  cannot  say  so  clearly  of  anything  else  in  our  religion,  neither  as 
to  faith  or  practice.  Now  must  we  force  our  interpretations  upon  others, 
pope-like  ?  How  do  you  cast  a  reproach  upon  us  who  are  Congregational 
in  England,  and  furnish  our  adversaries  with  weapons  against  us  !  We 
blush  and  are  filled  with  shame  and  confusion  of  face,  when  we  hear  of 
these  things.  Dear  brother,  we  pray  that  God  would  open  your  eyes,  and 
persuade  the  heart  of  your  magistrates,  that  they  may  no  more  smite  their 
fellow-servants,  nor  thus  greatly  injure  us  their  brethren,  and  that  they 
may  not  thus  dishonor  the  name  of  God.  My  dear  brother,  pardon  me, 
for  I  am  affected  ;  I  speak  for  God,  to  whose  grace  I  commend  you  all  in 
New  England  ;  and  humbly  craving  your  prayers  for  us  here,  and  remain 
your  affectionate  brother,  ROBERT  MASCALL.  . 

"  Finsbury,  near  Morefield,  March  25,  1669."  71 

It  seems  that  the  imprisoned  Baptists  were  by  some 
means  released  after  about  a  year's  confinement,  but  the 

70  "Emancipation  of  Massachussets,"  pp.  118-125. 

71  Backus's  "  Church  History  of  New  England,"  pp.  99-101. 


636  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

next  year  afterward  Gould  and  Turner  were  arrested  and 
imprisoned  "a  long  time." 

The  cases  which  we  have  cited  are  not  by  any  means  all 
the  persecutions  and  oppressions  that  fell  upon  the  Baptists  ; 
but  these  are  sufficient  to  show  that  the  persecution  was 
shameful  enough,  even  had  these  been  all  the  cases  that 
ever  occurred.  The  persecution  continued  even  beyond  the 
date  which  we  have  now  reached,  but  the  Baptists  were 
assisted  in  their  splendid  fight  for  freedom  of  thought  and 
of  worship,  and  relief  came  the  quicker  to  them,  by  the  no 
less  heroic  and  more  fearfully  persecuted  Quakers. 

THE    SUFFERINGS    OF    THE    QUAKERS. 

In  July,  1656,  Mary  Fisher  and  Anne  Austin,  two 
Quaker  women,  landed  in  Boston.  By  some  means,  news  of 
their  coming  had  preceded  them.  Before  they  were  allowed 
to  land  at  all,  Richard  Bellingham,  the  deputy-governor, 
Governor  Endicott  being  absent,  sent  officers  aboard  the 
ship,  "  searched  their  trunks  and  chests,  and  took  away  the 
books  they  found  there,  which  were  about  one  hundred,  and 
carried  them  ashore,  after  having  commanded  the  said 
women  to  be  kept  prisoners  aboard  ;  and  the  said  books 
were,  by  an  order  of  the  council,  burnt  in  the  market-place 
by  the  hangman."  The  women  were  soon  taken  from  the 
ship,  however,  and  at  once  "shut  up  close  prisoners,  and 
command  was  given  that  none  should  come  to  them  without 
leave ;  a  fine  of  five  pounds  being  laid  on  any  that  should 
otherwise  come  at  or  speak  with  them,  tho'  but  at  the 
window.  Their  pens,  ink,  and  paper  were  taken  from  them, 
and  they  not  suffered  to  have  any  candle-light  in  the  night 
season  ;  nay,  what  is  more,  they  were  stript  naked,  under 
pretense  to  know  whether  they  were  witches,  tho'  in  search- 
ing no  token  was  found  upon  them  but  of  innocence.  And 
in  this  search  they  were  so  barbarously  misused  that  modesty 
forbids  to  mention  it.  And  that  none  might  have  communi- 
cation with  them,  a  board  was  nailed  up  before  the  window 


FIRST  TREATMENT  OF   QUAKERS.  637 

of  the  jail."72     August  18,  the  following  order  was  issued 
to  the  jailer  : — 

"  To  the  Keeper  of  the  Boston,  Jail :  — 

You  are  by  virtue  hereof  to  keep  the  Quakers  formerly  committed  to 
your  custody  as  dangerous  persons,  industrious  to  improve  all  their 
abilities  to  seduce  the  people  of  this  jurisdiction,  both  by  words  and 
letters,  to  the  abominable  tenets  of  the  Quakers,  and  to  keep  them  close 
prisoners,  not  suffering  them  to  confer  with  any  person,  nor  permitting 
them  to  have  paper  or  ink. 

"Signed,  EDWARD  RAWSOX, 

"  Sec.  of  the  Boston  Court. 
"August  18,  16XC."1' 

They  were  not  only  denied  food  by  the  authorities,  but 
' '  liberty  was  denied  even  to  send  them  provisions. "  ' '  Seeing 
they  were  not  provided  with  victuals,  Nicholas  Upshal,  one 
who  lived  long  in  Boston,  and  was-a  member  of  the  church 
there,"  bought  of  the  jailer  for  five  shillings  a  week  the 
privilege  of  furnishing  them  with  food.  September  Y,  an- 
other order  was  issued  to  the  jailer,  commanding  him  "to 
search  as  often  as  he  saw  meet,  the  boxes,  chests,  and  things 
of  the  Quakers  formerly  committed  to  his  custody,  for  pen, 
ink,  and  paper,  papers  and  books,  and  to  take  them  from 
them."7* 

"After  having  been  about  five  weeks  prisoners,  William 
Chichester,  master  of  a  vessel,  was  bound  in  one  hundred 
pound  bond  to  carry  them  back,  and  not  suffer  any  to  speak 
with  them,  after  they  were  put  on  board  ;  and  the  jailer  kept 
their  beds  .  .  .  and  their  Bible,  for  his  fees."75  During 
the  imprisonment  they  were  frequently  examined  by  the 
ministers  with  a  view  to  getting  some  hold  on  them  by  which 
they  might  be  dealt  with  for  the  heresy  of  schism,  or  some 
other  such  crime,  but  all  in  vain.  It  was  well  for  the  two 
women  that  they  happened  to  be  sent  away  when  they  were, 
for  not  long  afterward  Endicott  returned,  and  was  not  a  little 

72  "  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  143,  144. 

73  Besse's  "Sufferings  of  the  Quakers."  74/<7. 
76  "  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  144. 


638  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

displeased  with  Bellingham,  the  deputy-governor,  for  dealing 
so  gently  with  them,  declaring  that  if  lie'  had  been  there,  he 
"would  have  had  them  well  whipped,"  although  as  yet  the 
colony  had  no  law  at  all  concerning  Quakers. 

These  two  women  had  not  been  long  gone  before  eight 
other  Quakers  arrived  in  Boston.  They  were  subjected  to  the 
same  sort  of  treatment  to  which  the  other  two  had  been.  In 
the  same  month  of  September,  the  Commissioners  of  the 
United  Colonies  met  at  Plymouth,  and  the  Boston  court 
called  upon  them  to  stir  up  Plymouth  Colony  to  vigilance, 
especially  against  the  Quakers.  The  letter  ran  as  follows  :  — 

"  Having  heard  some  time  since  that  our  neighboring  colony  of  Ply- 
mouth, our  beloved  brethren,  in  great  part  seem  to  be  wanting  to  them- 
selves in  a  due  acknowledgment  and  encouragement  of  the  ministry  of 
the  gospel,  so  as  many  pious  ministers  have  (how  justly  we  know  not) 
deserted  their  stations,  callings,  and  relations ;  our  desire  is  that  some 
such  course  may  be  taken,  as  that  a  pious  orthodox  ministry  may  be  re- 
stated among  them,  that  so  the  flood  of  errors  and  principles  of  anarchy 
may  be  prevented.  Here  hath  arrived  amongst  us  several  persons  pro- 
fessing themselves  Quakers,  fit  instruments  to  propagate  the  kingdom  of 
Satan  ,  for  the  securing  of  our  neighbors  from  such  pests,  we  have  im- 
prisoned them  all  till  they  be  dispatched  away  to  the  place  from  whence 
they  came."76 

"The  commissioners  gave  advice  accordingly,"  but  Brad- 
ford, who  was  governor  of  Plymouth,  would  not  take  any 
such  steps.  After  his  death,  however,  severe  measures 
were  adopted. 

October  14,  1656,  the  general  court  of  Massachusetts 
enacted  the  following  law  :  — 

"Whereas  there  is  an  accursed  sect  of  heretics  lately  risen  in  the 
world,  which  are  commonly  called  Quakers,  who  take  upon  them  to  be 
immediately  sent  of  God  and  infallibly  assisted  by  the  Spirit,  to  speak 
and  write  blasphemous  opinions,  despising  governments,  and  the  order 
of  God  in  the  church  and  commonwealth,  speaking  evil  of  dignities,  re- 
proaching and  reviling  magistrates  and  ministers,  seeking  to  turn  the 
people  from  the  faith,  and  gain  proselytes  to  their  pernicious  ways  : 
This  court  taking  into  consideration  the  premises,  and  to  prevent  the  like 
mischief  as  by  their  means  is  wrought  in  our  land,  doth  hereby  order, 
76  Backus's  "  Church  History  of  New  England,"  p.  89. 


FIRST  LAW  AGAINST  QUAKERS.  639 

and  by  the  authority  of  this  court  be  it  ordered  and  enacted  that  what 
master  or  commander  of  any  ship,  bark,  pink,  or  catch,  shall  henceforth 
bring  into  any  harbor,  creek,  or  cove,  within  this  jurisdiction,  any  Qua- 
ker or  Quakers,  or  other  blasphemous  heretics,  shall  pay,  or  cause  to  be 
paid,  the  fine  of  one  hundred  pounds  to  the  treasurer  of  the  county, 
except  it  appear  he  want  true  knowledge  or  information  on  their  being 
such,  and  in  that  case  he  hath  liberty  to  clear  himself  by  his  oath,  when 
sufficient  proof  to  the  contrary  is  wanting.  And  for  default  of  good 
payment,  or  good  security  for  it,  he  shall  be  cast  into  prison,  and  there 
to  continue  till  the  said  sum  be  satisfied  to  a  treasurer  as  aforesaid.  And 
the  commander  of  any  catch,  ship,  or  vessel,  being  legally  convicted, 
shall  give  in  sufficient  security  to  the  governor,  or-  any  one  or  more  of  the 
magistrates,  who  have  power  to  determine  the  same,  to  carry  them  back 
to  the  place  whence  he  brought  them,  and  on  his  refusal  to  do  so,  the 
governor  or  any  one  or  more  of  the  magistrates,  are  hereby  empowered 
to  issue  out  his  or  their  warrants  to  commit  such  master  or  commander 
to  prison,  there  to  continue  till  he  give  in  sufficient  security  to  the  con- 
tent of  the  governor,  or  any  of  the  ma;  istrates  as  aforesaid.  And  it  is 
hereby  further  ordered  and  enacted,  thai,  what  Quaker  soever  shall  arrive 
in  this  country  from  foreign  parts,  or  shall  come  into  this  jurisdiction  from 
any  parts  adjacent,  shall  be  forthwith  committed  to  the  house  of  correc- 
tion, and  at  their  entrance  to  be  severely  whipped,  and  by  the  master 
thereof  to  be  kept  constantly  to  work,  and  none  suffered  to  converse  or 
speak  with  them  during  the  time  of  their  imprisonment,  which  shall  be 
no  longer  than  necessity  requires.  And  it  is  ordered,  if  any  person  shall 
knowingly  import  into  any  harbor  of  this  jurisdiction  any  Quaker's 
books  or  writings  concerning  their  devilish  opinions,  he  shall  pay  for  such 
book  or  writing,  being  legally  proved  against  him  or  them,  the  sum  of 
five  pounds  ;  and  whosoever  shall  disperse  or  sell  any  such  book  or  writ- 
ing, and  it  be  found  with  him  or  her,  or  in  his  or  her  house,  and  shall 
not  immediately  deliver  the  same  to  the  next  magistrate,  shall  forfeit  or 
pay  five  pounds  for  the  dispersing  or  selling  of  every  such  book  or  writ- 
ing. And  it  is  hereby  further  enacted  that  if  any  person  within  this 
colony  shall  take  upon  them  to  defend  the  heretical  opinions  of  the 
Quakers,  or  any  of  their  books  or  papers  as  aforesaid,  being  legally 
proved,  shall  be  fined  for  the  first  time  forty  shillings ;  and  if  they  per- 
sist in  the  same,  and  shall  again  defend  it  the  second  time,  four  pounds ; 
if  they  shall  again  defend  and  maintain  said  accursed  heretical  opinions, 
they  shall  be  committed  to  the  house  of  correction  till  there  be  conven- 
ient passage  to  send  them  out  of  the  land,  being  sentenced  to  the  court  of 
assistants  to  banishment.  Lastly,  it  is  hereby  ordered  that  what  person 
or  persons  soever  shall  revile  the  person  of  magistrates  or  ministers  as  is 
usual  with  the  Quakers,  such  person  or  persons  shall  be  severely 
whipped,  or  pay  the  sum  of  five  pounds."77 

77 Basse's  "Sufferings  of  the  Quakers." 


640  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

When  this  law  was  published,  Nicholas  Upshal,  the 
kind  and  Christian  old  gentleman  who  had  bought  the 
privilege  of  feeding  Mary  Fisher  and  Anne  Austin,  when 
they  were  in  prison,  ' '  publicly  testified  against  it. "  The  next 
morning  he  was  summoned  to  answer  before  the  general 
court.  He  told  them  that  "  the  execution  of  that  law  would 
be  a  forerunner  of  a  judgment  upon  their  country,  and  there- 
fore in  love  and  tenderness  which  he  bare  to  the  people  and 
the  place,  desired  them  to  take  heed,  lest  they  were  found 
fighters  against  God."  He  was  fined  twenty  pounds, 
although  a  member  of  one  of  the  churches.  And  then 
having  absented  himself  from  church  on  account  of  these 
things,  he  was  fined  three  pounds,  and  banished,  although 
winter  was  now  come,  and  he  "  a  weakly,  ancient  man."78 

Notwithstanding  these  laws  and  penalties,  and  the  spirit 
to  inflict  the  penalties  in  the  severest  way,  the  Quakers 
continued  to  come.  In  fact,  wherever  such  laws  were,  that 
was  the  very  place  where  the  Quakers  wished  to  be,  because 
they  were  opposed  to  every  kind  of  soul-oppression  and 
every  form  of  the  union  of  Church  and  State.  Not  only 
in  this,  but  in  almost  everything  else,  their  views  made  them 
objects  of  special  hatred  to  the  theocrats  of  Massachusetts. 
They  recognized  no  such  distinction  among  Christians  as 
clergy  and  laity,  and  could  neither  be  coaxed  nor  forced  to 
pay  tithes.  They  refused  to  do  military  service,  and  would 
not  take  an  oath.  They  would  not  take  their  hats  off  either 
in  church  or  in  court.  ' '  In  doctrine  their  chief  peculiarity 
was  the  assertion  of  an  'inward  light,'  by  which  every  in- 
dividual is  to  be  guided  in  his  conduct  of  life."  And  "the 
doctrine  of  the  'inward  light,'  or  of  private  inspiration,  was 
something  especially  hateful  to  the  Puritan."  —  FisJ^e.19 
Another  thing  no  less  hateful  to  the  Puritan  than  this,  was 
their  refusal  to  keep  Sunday  in  the  Puritan  way.  They 
called  "in  question  the  propriety  of  Christians  turning  the 

78  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  146. 
""Beginnings  of  New  England,"  p.  180. 


RHODE  ISLAND'S   GLORIOUS  APPEAL.  641 

Lord's  da  y  into  a  Jewish  Sabbath."  —  Fiske.™  They  were 
denounced  as  infidels,  blasphemers,  agents  of  the  devil,  and 
were  counted  as  easily  guilty  of  every  heresy  and  every  crime 
in  the  Puritan  theocratical  catalogue. 

Admission  to  the  confederacy  of  the  New  England  colo- 
nies had  been  absolutely  refused  Rhode  Island,  on  account 
of  its  principles  of  liberty  of  conscience  ;  but  hatred  of  the 
Quakers  led  Massachusetts  colony  in  1657  to  ask  Rhode 
Island  to  join  the  confederacy  in  the  endeavor  to  save  New 
England  from  the  Quakers.  "They  sent  a  letter  to  the 
authorities  of  that  colony,  signing  themselves  their  loving 
friends  and  neighbors,  and  beseeching  them  to  preserve  the 
whole  body  of  colonists  against  'such  a  pest,'  by  banishing 
and  excluding  all  Quakers,  a  measure  to  which  '  the  rule  of 
charity  did  oblige  them.'  '  -  Fiske.*1 

But  Roger  Williams  was  still  president  of  Rhode  Island, 
and,  true  to  his  principles,  he  replied:  "We  have  no  law 
amongst  us  whereby  to  punish  any  for  only  declaring  by 
words  their  minds  and  understandings  concerning  things 
and  ways  of  God  as  to  salvation  and  our  eternal  condition.  As 
for  these  Quakers,  we  find  that  where  they  are  most  of  all 
suffered  to  declare  themselves  freely  and  only  opposed  by 
arguments  in  discourse,  there  they  least  of  all  desire  to 
come.  Any  breach  of  the  civil  law  shall  be  punished,  but 
the  freedom  of  different  consciences  shall  be  respected."82 

This  reply  enraged  the  whole  confederacy.  Massachu- 
setts threatened  to  cut  off  the  trade  of  Rhode  Island.  In 
this  strait  Rhode  Island,  by  Roger  Williams,  appealed  for 
protection  to  Cromwell,  who  now  ruled  England.  The  ap- 
peal presented  the  case  as  it  was,  but  that  which  made  it  of 


80  Id.  81  /^  p-  184< 

88  Jd.,  pp.  184,  185.  This  was  not  in  any  sense  an  expression  of  indifference 
as  to  the  teachings  of  the  Quakers;  because  by  discussion  Roger  was  constantly 
combating  them.  He  wrote  a  book  against  them,  entitled,  "  George  Fox  Digged 
out  of  his  Burrowes,"  and  at  the  age  of  seven  ty-three  he  "  rowed  himself  in  a 
boat  the  whole  length  of  Narragansett  Bay  to  engage  in  a  theological  tourna- 
ment against  three  Quaker  champions."  —  Id.,  p.  186. 


642  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

everlasting  importance,  as  the  grandest  and  most  touching 
appeal  in  all  history,  is  the  piteous  plea,  "  But  whatever 
fortune  may  "befall,  let  us  not  be  compelled  to  exercise  any 
civil  power  over  metis  consciences."™ 

In  this  year,  October  14,  another  law  was  passed  against 
Quakers,  in  which  it  was  enacted  that  — 

"If  any  person  or  persons  within  this  jurisdiction  shall  henceforth 
entertain  and  conceal  any  such  Quaker  or  Quakers,  or  other  blasphem- 
ous heretics,  knowing  them  so  to  be,  every  such  person  shall  forfeit  to 
the  country  forty  shillings  for  every  such  hour's  entertainment  and  con- 
cealment of  any  Quaker  or  Quakers,  etc.,  as  aforesaid,  and  shall  be  com- 
mitted to  prison  as  aforesaid,  till  forfeiture  be  fully  satisfied  and  paid  : 
and  it  is  further  ordered  that  if  any  Quaker  or  Quakers  shall  presume, 
after  they  have  once  suffered  what  the  law  requires,  to  come  into  this 
jurisdiction,  every  such  male  Quaker  shall  for  the  first  offense  have  one 
of  his  ears  cut  off,  and  be  kept  at  work  in  the  house  of  correction  till  he 
can  be  sent  away  at  his  own  charge,  and  for  the  second  offense  shall 
have  his  other  ear  cut  off :  and  every  woman  Quaker  that  has  fulfilled 
the  law  here  that  shall  presume  to  come  into  this  jurisdiction,  shall  be 
severely  whipped,  and  kept  at  the  house  of  correction  at  work,  till  she 
be  sent  away  at  her  own  charge,  and  so  also  for  her  coming  again  she 
shall  be  alike  used  as  aforesaid :  and  for  every  Quaker,  he  or  she,  that 
shall  presume  a  third  time  herein  again  to  offend,  they  shall  have  their 
tongues  burned  through  with  a  red-hot  iron,  and  be  kept  at  the  house  of 
correction  close  to  work,  till  they  be  sent  away  at  their  own  charge. 
And  it  is  further  ordered  that  all  and  every  Quaker  arising  from  among 
ourselves,  shall  be  dealt  with,  and  suffer  the  like  punishments,  as  the 
law  provides  against  foreign  Quakers."84 

The  Quakers,  however,  not  only  continued  to  come,  and 
to  come  again  when  imprisoned,  whipped,  and  banished  ; 
but  their  preachings,  and  much  more  their  persecutions, 
raised  up  others  in  the  colonies.  This  result  followed  so 
promptly  that  May  20,  1058,  the  following  statute  was 
enacted  :  — 

' '  That  Quakers  and  such  accursed  heretics,  arising  among  ourselves, 

may  be   dealt  with  according  to  their  deserts,  and  that  their  pestilent 

errors  and  practices  may  be  speedily  prevented,  it  is  hereby  ordered,   as 

an  addition  to  the  former  laws  against  Quakers,  that  every  such  person 

83 Id.  M  Basse's  "  Sufferings  of  the  Quakers." 


HORRIBLE  LAWS  AGAINST  THE   QUAKERS.          643 

or  persons,  professing  any  of  their  pernicious  ways  by  speaking,  writing, 
or  by  meeting  on  the  Lord's  day,  or  at  any  other  time,  to  strengthen 
themselves,  or  seduce  others  to  their  diabolical  doctrines,  shall,  after  due 
means  of  conviction,  incur  the  penalty  ensuing  ;  that  is,  every  person  so 
meeting,  shall  pay  to  the  country  for  every  time  ten  shillings ;  and  every 
one  speaking  in  such  meeting,  shall  pay  five  pounds  apiece  ;  and  in  case 
any  such  person,  after  having  been  punished  by  scourging  or  whipping 
for  such,  according  to  the.  former  law,  shall  be  still  kept  at  work  in  the 
house  of  correction,  till  they  put  in  security  with  two  sufficient  men, 
that  they  shall  not  any  more  vent  their  hateful  errors,  nor  use  their  sin- 
ful practices,  or  else  shall  depart  this  jurisdiction  at  their  own  charges, 
and  if  any  of  them  return  again,  then  each  such  person  shall  incur  the 
penalty  of  the  law  formerly  made  for  strangers."85 

In  1058  "Rev."  John  Norton,  supported  by  the  rest  of 
the  clergy,  circulated  a  petition  praying  that  the  penalty  of 
death  should  be  visited  upon  all  Quakers  who  should  return 
after  having  been  banished.  The  Board  of  Commissioners 
of  the  United  Colonies  met  in  Boston  in  September.  The 
petition  was  presented  to  the  Board,  which  in  response 
advised  the  general  court  of  each  colony  to  enact  such  a  law. 
Accordingly,  October  1 6,  the  general  court  of  Massachusetts 
enacted  the  following  law  :  — 

"Whereas  there  is  a  pernicious  sect,  commonly  called  Quakers,  lately 
risen,  who  by  word  and  writing  have  published  and  maintained  many 
dangerous  and  horrid  tenets,  and  do  take  upon  them  to  change  and  alter 
the  received  laudable  customs  of  our  nation,  in  giving  civil  respect  to 
equals,  or  reverence  to  superiors  ;  whose  actions  tend  to  undermine  the 
civil  government,  and  also  to  destroy  the  order  of  the  churches,  by  deny- 
ing all  established  forms  of  worship,  and  by  withdrawing  from  orderly 
church  fellowship,  allowed  and  approved  by  all  orthodox  professors 
of  truth,  and  instead  thereof,  and  in  opposition  thereunto,  frequently 
meeting  by  themselves,  insinuating  themselves  into  the  minds  of  the 
simple,  or  such  as  are  least  affected  to  the  order  and  government  of 
church  and  commonwealth,  whereby  divers  particular  inhabitants  have 
been  infected,  notwithstanding  all  former  laws  made,  upon  the  experi- 
ence of  their  arrogant  and  bold  obtrusions,  to  disseminate  their  princi- 
ples amongst  us,  prohibiting  their  coming  into  this  jurisdiction,  they 
have  not  been  deterred  from  their  impious  attempts  to  undermine  our 

peace  and  hazard  our  ruin  : 

85  Id. 


644  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

"For  prevention  thereof,  this  court  doth  order  and  enact  that  every 
person  or  persons,  of  the  cursed  sect  of  the  Quakers,  who  is  not  an 
inhabitant  of,  but  is  found  within,  this  jurisdiction,  shall  be  apprehended 
without  warrant,  where  no  magistrate  is  at  hand,  by  any  constable,  com- 
missioner, or  selectman,  and  conveyed  from  constable  to  constable,  to 
the  next  magistrate,  who  shall  commit  the  said  person  to  close  prison, 
there  to  remain  (without  bail)  unto  the  next  court  of  assistants,  where 
they  shall  have  a  legal  trial:  and  being  convicted  [Xote  :  "  For  which 
conviction,  it  was  counted  sufficient  that  they  appeared  with  their  hats 
on  or  said  '  thee  '  and  '  thou.'  "  ]  to  be  of  the  sect  of  the  Quakers,  shall  be 
sentenced  to  be  banished  upon  pain  of  death  :  and  that  every  inhabitant 
of  this  jurisdiction  being  convicted  to  be  of  the  aforesaid  sect,  either  by 
taking  up,  publishing,  or  defending  the  horrid  opinions  of  the  Quakers, 
or  the  stirring  up  of  mutiny,  sedition,  or  rebellion  against  the  govern- 
ment, or  by  taking  up  their  abusive  and  destructive  practices,  viz.,  deny- 
ing civil  respect  to  equals  and  superiors,  and  withdrawing  from  our 
church  assemblies,  and  instead  thereof  frequenting  meetings  of  their  own 
in  opposition  to  our  church  order,  or  by  adhering  to,  or  approving  of,  any 
known  Quaker,  and  the  tenets  and  practices  of  Quakers,  that  are  opposite 
to  the  orthodox  received  opinions  of  the  godly,  and  endeavoring  to  dis- 
affect  others  to  civil  government  and  church  orders,  or  condemning  the 
practice  and  proceedings  of  this  court  against  the  Quakers,  manifesting 
thereby  their  complying  with  those  whose  design  is  to  overthrow  the 
order  established  in  Church  and  State,  every  such  person  upon  con- 
viction before  the  said  court  of  assistants,  in  manner  aforesaid,  shall  be 
committed  to  close  prison  for  one  month,  and  then,  unless  they  choose 
voluntarily  to  depart  this  jurisdiction,  shall  give  bond  for  their  good 
behavior,  and  appear  at  the  next  court,  where,  continuing  obstinate,  and 
refusing  to  retract  and  reform  their  aforesaid  opinions,  they  shall  be  sen- 
tenced to  banishment  upon  pain  of  death  ;  and  any  one  magistrate  upon 
information  given  him  of  any  such  person,  shall  cause  him  to  be  appre- 
hended, and  shall  commit  any  such  person  to  prison,  according  to  his 
discretion,  until  he  come  to  trial  as  aforesaid."86 

Kor  were  any  of  these  laws  in  any  sense  a  dead  letter. 
They  were  enforced  in  the  regular  Puritan  way.  In  1657 
the  following  order  was  issued  by  Governor  Endicott  :  — 

"To  the  marshall  general  or  his  deputy  :  You  are  to  take  with  you 
the  executioner,  and  repair  to  the  house  of  correction,  and  there  see 
him  cutoff  the  right  ears  of  John  Copeland,  Christopher  Holder,  and  John 
Rouse,  Quakers,  in  execution  of  the  sentence  of  the  court  of  assistants  for 
the  breach  of  the  law  instituted,  'Quakers.' "  87 

86  Id.  87  Id. 


HORRIBLE   TORTURES   OF   QUAKERS. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  same  year  the  following  order 
was  issued  by  the  court  :  — 

"Whereas  Daniel  South-wick  and  Provided  Southwick,  son  and 
daughter  of  Lawrence  Southwick,  absentin'fj  themselves  from  the  public  or- 
dinances, have  been  fined  by  the  courts  of  Salem  and  Ipswich,  pretending 
they  have  no  assistance,  'and  resolving  not  to  work,  the  court,  upon 
perusal  of  a  law,  which  was  made  upon  account  of  debts,  in  answer  to 
what  should  be  done  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  fines,  resolves  that  the 
treasurers  of  the  several  counties  are  and  shall  be  fully  empowered  to 
sell  the  said  persons  to  any  of  the  English  nation,  at  Virginia  or  Barba- 
does,  to  answer  the  said  fines. 88 

With  this  latter  sentence  there  is  connected  an  important 
series  of  events.  As  stated  in  this  order,  these  two  persons 
were  son  and  daughter  of  Lawrence  Southwick.  Lawrence 
Southwick  and  his  wife  Cassandra,  were  an  aged  couple  who 
had  been  members  of  the  Salem  church  until  about  the  close 
of  1656.  They  had  three  children,  Joseph,  who  was  a  man 
grown,  and  the  two  mentioned  above,  who  were  but  mere 
youth.  The  old  gentleman  and  his  wife  were  arrested  at  the 
beginning  of  the  year  1657,  upon  a  charge  of  harboring 
Quakers.  The  old  gentleman  was  released,  but  as  a  Quaker 
tract  was  found  upon  his  wife,  she  was  imprisoned  seven  weeks, 
and  fined  forty  shillings.  If  they  were  not  Quakers  before, 
this  made  them  such,  and  likewise  some  of  their  friends.  A 
number  of  them  now  withdrew  from  the  Salem  church,  and 
worshiped  by  themselves.  All  were  arrested.  Lawrence 
and  Cassandra  Southwick  and  their  son  Joseph,  were  taken 
to  Boston  to  be  dealt  with.  Upon  their  arrival  there,  Febru- 
ary 3,  without  even  the  form  of  a  trial  they  were  whipped 
and  imprisoned  eleven  days,  the  weather  being  extremely 
cold.  In  addition  to  this,  they  were  fined  four  pounds  and 
thirteen  shillings,  for  six  weeks'  absence  from  church  on  Sun- 
day, and  their  cattle  were  seized  and  sold  to  pay  this  fine. 

The  following  summer  two  Quakers,  William  Leddra  and 
William  Brend,  went  to  Salem.  They,  with  five  others, 


49 


88  Id. 


646  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

among  whom  were  the  Southwicks  who  before  had  suffered, 
were  arrested  for  meeting  together.  They  were  all  taken  to 
Boston,  and  put  all  together  in  a  room  in  the  prison,  of  which 
the  windows  were  boarded  up  close.  Food  was  denied  them, 
unless  they  would  work*  to  par  for  it.  uTo  work  when 
wrongfully  confined,  was  against  the  Quaker's  conscience." 
—  Adams."'  They  therefore  went  five  days  without  any- 
thing to  eat.  This,  however,  was  only  a  part  of  their  suf- 
ferings, for  on  the  second  day  of  their  imprisonment,  they 
all  were  severely  whipped,  and  then  with  raw  wounds  were 
thrown  back  into  the  close  dark  room,  in  the  July  heat,  with 
nothing  to  lie  upon  but  the  bare  boards.  On  the  second  day 
afterwards  they  were  informed  that  they  could  go  if  they 
would  pay  the  constables  and  jail  fees.  They  refused  to  pay 
anything.  The  next  day  the  jailer,  in  order  to  force  them  to 
yield,  took  Brend,  and  with  irons  bound  his  neck  and  heels 
together,  and  kept  him  that  way'  for  sixteen  hours,  from  five 
o'clock  in  the  morning  till  nine  o'clock  at  night. 

The  next  day  Brend  was  put  to  the  mill  and  ordered  to 
work.  He  could  not  have  worked  if  he  would,  as  he  could 
scarcely  move  ;  but  he  would  not  have  worked  if  he  could, 
and  so  he  refused.  Then  in  a  rage  *'  the  gaoler  took  a 
pitched  rope,  about  an  inch  thick,  and  gave  him  twenty 
blows  over  his  back  and  arms  with  all  his  strength,  till  the 
rope  untwisted  ;  then  he  fetched  another  rope,  thicker  and 
stronger,  and  told  Brend  that  he  would  cause  him  to  bow  to 
the  law  of  the  country,  and  make  him  work.  Brend  thought 
this  in  the  highest  degree  unreasonable,  since  he  had  com- 
mitted no  evil,  and  was  wholly  unable  to  work,  having  been 
kept  five  days  without  eating,  and  whipped  also,  and  now 
thus  unmercifully  beaten.  Yet  in  the  morning  the  gaoler 
relented  not,  but  began  to  beat  again  with  his'  pitched  rope 
on  the  poor  man's  bruised  body,  and  foaming  at  the  mouth 
like  a  madman,  with  violence  laid  four  score  and  seventeen 
more  blows  upon  him,  as  other  prisoners,  who  beheld  this 

89  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  164. 


THE  PEOPLE  EFFECT  A  RESCUE.       647 

cruelty  with  grief  and  passion  reported.  And  if  his 
strength  and  his  rope  had  not  failed  him,  he  would  have 
laid  on  more.  He  thought  also  to  give  him  the  next  morn- 
ing as  many  blows  more.  ...  To  what  condition  these 
blows  must  have  brought  the  body  of  Brend,  who  had  noth- 
ing on  but  a  serge  cossack  over-shirt,  may  easily  be  con- 
ceived. His  back  and  arms  were  bruised  and  bleeding,  and 
the  blood  hanging,  as  it  were,  in  bags  under  his  arms,  and 
so  into  one  was  his  flesh  beaten  that  the  sign  of  a  particular 
blow  could  not  be  seen.  His  body  being  thus  cruelly  tort- 
ured, he  lay  down  upon  the  boards  so  extremely  weakened  that 
the  natural  parts  decaying,  and  his  strength  failing,  his  body 
turned  cold  ;  there  seemed,  as  it  were,  a  struggle  between 
life  and  death  ;  his  senses  were  stopped,  and  he  had  for  some 
time  neither  seeing,  feeling,  nor  hearing  ;  till  at  length  a 
divine  power  prevailing,  life  broke  through  death,  and  the 
breath  of  the  Lord  was  breathed  in  his  nostrils.'-90 

The  people  now,  horrified  at  the  outrage,  would  bear  no 
more.  Aery  was  raised,  they  "rushed  to  the  jail,  and  rescued 
the  tortured  prisoner.  This  rather  frightened  the  govern- 
ment. Endicott  sent  his  own  family  doctor  to  succor  Brend, 
but  the  surgeon  pronounced  the  case  hopeless  —  that  the 
flesh  would  "  rot  from  off  his  bones,"  and  he  must  die.  The 
cry  of  the  people  grew  louder,  arid  their  indignation  more 
fierce.  They  demanded  that  the  barbarous  jailer  should  be 
brought  to  justice.  The  magistrate  posted  up  on  the  church 
door  a  promise  that  he  should  be  brought  to  trial,  but  here 
the  "Rev."  John  Norton  stepped  forth,  declaring:  "Brend 
endeavored  to  beat  our  gospel  ordinances  black  and  blue  ; 
if  he  then  be  beaten  black  and  blue,  it  is  but  just  upon  him, 
and  I  will  appear  in  his  behalf  that  did  so."  He  rebuked 
the  magistrates  for  their  faintness  of  heart,  and  commanded 
them  to  take  down  the  notice  from  the  church  door.  They 
obeyed,  and  the  cruel  jailer  was  not  only  justified,  but  was 
commanded  to  whip  the  Quakers  who  were  yet  in  prison 

90Besse's  "Sufferings  of  the  Quakers." 


64:8  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

"  twice  a  week  if  they  refused  to  work,  and  the  first  time  to 
add  five  stripes  to  the  former  ten,  and  each  time  to  add  three 
to  them."91 

The  other  prisoners  now  presented  a  petition  to  the  court 
praying  to  be  released.  Their  petition  was  dated,  "From 
the  House  of  Bondage  in  Boston,  wherein  we  are  made  cap- 
tives by  the  wills  of  men,  although  made  free  by  the  Son 
(John  viii,  36),  in  which  we  quietly  rest,  this  sixteenth  of 
the  fifth  month,  1658."  They  were  brought  into  court  for 
examination.  They  made  so  strong  a  defense  that  there 
appeared  some  prospect  of  their  acquittal ;  but  the  preachers 
rallied  in  force.  The  "Rev."  Charles  Chauncy,  in  "the 
Thursday  lecture,"  preached  as  follows  :  — 

"  Suppose  you  should  catch  six  wolves  in  a  trap  [there  were  six  Salem 
Quakers],  .  .  .  and  ye  cannot  prove  that  they  killed  either  sheep  or 
lambs  ;  and  now  ye  have  them,  they  will  neither  bark  nor  bite  ;  yet  they 
have  the  plain  marks  of  wolves.  Now  I  leave  it  to  your  consideration 
whether  ye  will  let  them  go  alive  ;  yea  or  nay  ?  "  9* 

By  their  diligence  the  preachers  not  only  prevented  any 
acquittal,  but  succeeded  in  forcing  through  the  law  of  Octo- 
ber 16,  1658,  above  quoted  (pages  6-4o-4-),  inflicting  capital 
punishment  upon  all  who  remained,  or  returned  after  sen- 
tence of  banishment.  The  very  day  on  which  this  law  was 
passed,  the  prisoners  were  brought  into  court,  and  sentence 
of  banishment  was  pronounced,  the  Southwicks  being  com- 
manded to  leave  before  the  spring  elections.  They  did  not 
go.  In  May,  1659,  they  were  called  up  again,  and  charged 
with  rebellion  for  not  going  as  commanded.  They  pleaded 
that  they  had  no  place  to  go  to,  and  that  they  had  done  noth- 
ing to  deserve  either  banishment  or  death,  though  all  they  had 
in  the  world  had  been  taken  from  them.  "Major-General 
Dennison  replied  that  'they  stood  against  the  authority  of 
the  country,  in  not  submitting  to  their  laws  :  that  he  should 
not  go  about  to  speak  much  concerning  the  error  of  their 

91  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  166.  OT  fd.,  p.  169. 


CHILDREN  OFFERED  AS  SLAVES.  ('49 

judgments:  but,' added  he,  'You  and  \ve  are  not  able  well 
to  live  together,  and  at  present  the  power  is  in  our  hand, 
and  therefore  the  stronger  must  send  off.'' 

Accordingly  the  sentence  of  banishment  was  again  pro- 
nounced under  the  penalty  of  death.  "The  aged  couple 
were  sent  to  Shelter  Island,  but  their  misery  was  well-nigh 
done  ;  they  perished  within  a  few  days  of  each  other,  tort- 
ured to  death  by  flogging  and  starvation."  —Adams.9* 
Their. son  Joseph  was  sent  away  in  a  ship  to  England. 

Then  the  two  children,  Daniel  and  Provided,  were  brought 
before  the  court.  They  were  asked  why  they  had  not  come 
to  church.  Daniel  replied,  "If  you  had  not  so  persecuted 
our  father  and  mother,  perhaps  we  might  have  come." 
They  were  fined.  As  parents  and  home  and  all  were  gone, 
it  was  impossible  for  them  to  pay  any  fine  ;  and  as  there 
was  not  much  prospect  of  the  government's  making  any- 
thing out  of  an  attempt  to  force  children  to  work,  even  by 
flogging,  the  sentence  quoted  on  page  645  was  pronounced, 
commanding  the  county  treasurers  to  sell  them  to  recover 
the  fine. 

The  treasurer  of  Salern  took  the  children  to  Boston,  and 
went  to  a  ship's  captain  who  was  about  to  sail  for  Barbadoes, 
and  began  to  bargain  for  their  passage  to  that  place  to  be 
sold.  The  captain  said  he  was  afraid  they  would  corrupt  his 
ship's  company. 

TJte  treasurer.  — "  Oh  no,  you  need  not  fear  that,  for  they 
are  poor,  harmless  creatures,  and  will  not  hurt  anybody." 

Tlie  captain. —  "Will  they  not  so?  And  will  ye  offer 
to  make  slaves  of  so  harmless  creatures  ?  " 95 

Fortunately,  no  others  could  be  found  so  inhuman  as  the 
Puritans,  and  they  were  compelled  to  let  the  children  go. 

In  September,  1659,  three  Quakers,  William  Robinson, 
Marmaduke  Stevenson,  and  Mary  Dyer,  who  had  but  lately 
come  to  Boston,  were  banished.  Mrs.  Dyer  was  wife  of  the 
secretary  of  Rhode  Island.  She  returned  home.  Robinson 

93  Id.,  p.  170.  94/d.  95/(7.,  p.  173. 


650  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

and  Stevenson  went  as  far  as  Salem,  where  they  turned  about 
and  went  back  to  Boston.  Not  long  afterward,  Mrs.  Dyer 
returned.  October  20,  they  were  brought  before  the  gen- 
eral court.  Being  called  to  the  bar,  Governor  Endicott 
commanded  the  officer  to  pull  off  the  men's  hats.  He  then 
said  :  — • 

"We  have  made  several  laws  to  keep  the  Quakers  from  amongst  us, 
and  neither  whipping,  nor  imprisonment,  nor  cutting  off  ears,  nor  ban- 
ishment upon  pain  of  death,  can  keep  them  from  us.  Neither  I  nor  any 
of  us  desire  the  death  of  any  of  them.  Give  ear  and  hearken  to  your 
sentence  of  death."96 

He  then  sentenced  them  one  by  one  to  be  hanged. 
October  27  was  the  day  set  for  the  execution.  For  fear  the 
people  might  effect  a  rescue,  a  guard  was  put  upon  the 
prison.  As  the  day  drew  near,  the  dissatisfaction  of  the 
people  became  more  marked,  and  when  the  time  came,  it 
was  deemed  necessary  to  have  a  company  of  two  hundred 
armed  men,  to  make  sure  that  the  theocrats  might  accom- 
plish the  hanging.  The  three  prisoners  marched  hand  in 
hand  to  the  scaffold  on  Boston  Common,  with  drums  beating 
before  them  to  drown  any  words  that  they  might  speak. 
As  the  procession  moved  along,  "Rev."  John  Wilson,  the 
Boston  preacher,  with  others  of  the  clergy,  stood  ready  to 
join  in  the  march.  Wilson  tauntingly  cried  out,  "Shall 
such  jacks  as  you  come  in  before  authority,  with  your  hats 
on?"  Robinson  replied,  "Mind  you,  mind  you,  it  is  for 
not  putting  off  the  hat  we  are  put  to  death."  When, they 
reached  the  gallows,  Eobinson  attempted  to  speak  to  the 
people,  but  Wilson  interrupted  him  with,  "Hold  your 
tongue,  be  silent  ;  thou  art  going  to  die  with  a  lie  in  thy 
mouth."  The  two  men  were  then  bound  and  hanged.  The 
rope  was  placed  round  Mrs.  Dyer's  neck,  but  her  son  just 
then  arrived  from  Rhode  Island,  and  upon  his  earnest  en- 
treaty and  promise  to  take  her  away,  they  let  her  go.  The 
bodies  of  the  two  men  were  tumbled  into  a  hole  in  the 

^Besse's  "Sufferings  of  the  Quakers." 


THE  DEATH  PENALTY  IS  DEFEATED.      651 

ground,  and  left  exposed  with  no  sort  of  burial.  The  next 
spring,  however,  Mrs.  Dyer  returned  again.  June  1,  she 
was  again  marched  to  the  gallows.  At  the  last  moment  she 
was  told  that  see  might  go  if  she  would  promise  to  stay 
away.  She  answered,  "In  obedience  to  the  will  of  the 
Lord,  I  came,  and  in  his  will  I  abide  faithful  unto  death." 
And  so  they  hanged  her.97 

In  November,  William  Leddra,  who  had  been  banished, 
returned  to  Boston.  He  was  at  once  arrested,  but  public 
opinion  was  now  so  strong  against  the  persecution  that  the 
government  made  every  effort  to  persuade  him  to  go  away. 
But  he  would  not  go.  He  was  kept  in  prison  four  months, 
and  at  last,  in  March,  he  was  sentenced  to  be  hanged.  A 
few  days  before  his  execution,  he  was  called  before  the  court, 
and  as  he  was  being  questioned,  Wenlock  Christison,  another 
Qu-aker  who  had  that  moment  returned  from  banishment, 
walked  into  the  court  room,  and,  standing  before  the  judges 
with  uplifted  hand,  said  :  "I  am  come  here  to  warn  you  that 
ye  shed  no  more  innocent  blood."  He  was  arrested  and 
taken  at  once  to  jail. 

Leddra  was  hanged,  but  Christison  remained  ;  and  as  he 
had  openly  rebuked  the  judges,  his  case  was  the  more  notori- 
ous. But  as  the  discontented  murmurings  of  the  people 
grew  louder  and  louder,  the  government  hesitated  to  proceed. 
The  theocrats,  however,  were  not  yet  ready  to  yield,  and  so 
they  brought  him  to  trial  before  the  general  court,  both  the 
governor  and  the  deputy-governor  being  present. 

Endicott.  —  "Unless  you  renounce  your  religion,  you 
shall  die." 

Christison. —  "Nay;  I  shall  not  change  my  religion, 
nor  seek  to  save  my  life  ;  neither  do  I  intend  to  deny  my 
Master ;  but  if  I  lose  my  life  for  Christ's  sake,  and  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel,  I  shall  save  my  life. " 


97 " Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  175,  176;    "Beginnings  of  New 
England,"  pp.  188,  189.  . 


652  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

Endicott. —  "  Wlftt  liave  you  to  say  for  yourself,  why 
you  should  not  die  ?  " 

Christison. —  "  By  what  law  will  you  put  me  to  death?  " 

Endicott. —  "We  have  a  law,  and  by  our  law  you  are 
to  die." 

Christison. —  "So  said  the  Jews  of  Christ,  'We  have  a 
law,  and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die  ! '  Who  empowered  you 
to  make  that  law  ?  " 

One  of  the  Board.  —  "We  have  a  patent,  and  are  the 
patentees  ;  judge  whether  we  have  not  power  to  make  laws." 

Christison. — ."How,  have  you  power  to  make  laws  re- 
pugnant to  the  laws  of  England  ? " 

Endicott.-—  "No." 

Christison. —  "Then  you  are  gone  beyond  your  bounds, 
and  have  forfeited  your  patent  ;  and  that  is  more  than  you 
can  answer.  Are  you  subjects  to  the  king?  yea  or  nay?  " 

One  of  the  Court. —  "Yea,  we  are  so." 

Christison. —  "Well,  so  am  I.  Therefore  seeing  that  you 
and  I  are  subjects  to  the  king,  I  demand  to  be  tried  by  the 
laws  of  my  own  nation." 

One  of  the  Court. —  "You  shall  be  tried  by  a  bench  and 
a  jury." 

Christison. —  "  That  is  not  the  law,  but  the  manner  of  it ; 
for  I  never  heard  nor  read  of  any  law  that  was  in  England, 
to  hang  Quakers." 

Endicott. —  "There  is  a  law  to  hang  Jesuits." 

Christison. —  "If  you  put  me  to  death,  it  is  not  because  I 
go  under  the  name  of  a  Jesuit,  but  of  a  Quaker.  Therefore 
I  appeal  to  the  laws  of  my  own  nation." 

One  of  the  Court. —  "You  are  in  our  hands,  you  have 
broken  our  law,  and  we  will  try  you." 

In  the  very  midst  of  the  trial,  a  letter  was  brought  in  and 
handed  to  the  court.  It  was  from  Edward  Wharton,  yet 
another  Quaker  who  had  returned  from  banishment.  The 
letter  states  :  "Whereas  you  have  banished  me  on  pain  of 
death,  yet  I  am  at  home  in  my  own  house  at  Salem,  and 
therefore  purpose  that  you  will  take  off  your  wicked  sentence 


"A  IIUMANER  POLICY."  653 

from  me,  that  I  may  go  about  my  occasions  out  of  your 
jurisdiction." 

The  trial  was  over ;  but  what  should  they  do  with  the 
Quaker?  They  were  afraid  to  sentence  him,  and  they  could 
not  bear  to  confess  defeat  by  letting  him  go.  The  court  de- 
bated among  themselves  more  than  two  weeks  what  to  do. 
"Endicott  was  exasperated  to  frenzy,  for  he  felt  the  ground 
crumbling  beneath  him  ;  he  put  the  fate  of  Christison  to  the 
vote,  arid  failed  to  carry  a  condemnation.  The  governor 
seeing  this  division,  said,  '  I  could  find  it  in  my  heart  to  go 
home  ; '  being  in  such  a  rage,  that  he  flung  -something  furi- 
ously on  the  table.  .  .  .  Then  the  governor  put  the  court  to 
vote  again  ;  but  this  was  done  confusedly,  which  so  incensed 
the  governor  that  he  stood  up  and  said,  '  You  that  will  not 
consent,  record  it :  I  thank  God  I  am  not  afraid  to  give 
judgment.  .  .  .  Wenlock  Christison,  hearken  to  your  sen- 
tence :  You  must  return  unto  the  place  from  whence  you 
came,  and  from  thence  to  the  place  of  execution,  and  there 
you  must  be  hanged  until  you  are  dead,  dead,  dead.' " 98 

The  sentence  of  the  court  was  to  put  Christison  to  death  ; 
but  they  never  dared  to  execute  it.  "Even  the  savage 
Endicott  knew  well  that  all  the  train  bands  of  the  colony 
could  not  have  guarded  Christison  to  the  gallows  from  the 
dungeon  where  he  lay  condemned/' — Adams." 

The  sentence  of  death,  as  such,  they  were  thus  forced  to 
abandon  ;  but  they  still  hoped  to  accomplish  the  same  thing 
by  another,  and  as  their  chief  apologist  defined,  a  "  humaner 
policy."  For  this  purpose  the  "  Vagabond  Act  "  was  passed 
May  22,  1661,  by  which  it  was  enacted  that,  "Any  person 
convicted  before  a  county  magistrate  of  being  an  undomiciled 
or  vagabond  Quaker,  was  to  be  stripped  naked  to  the  middle, 
tied  to  the  cart's  tail,  and  flogged  from  town  to  town,  to  the 
border.  Domiciled  Quakers  to  be  proceeded  against  under 
Act  of  1658  to"  banishment,  and  then  treated  as  vagabond 

98  "Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  18,  151,152  ;  "  Beginnings  of  New 
England,"  p.  190. 

""Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  p.  177. 


654  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

Quakers.  The  death  penalty  was  still  preserved,  but  not 
enforced. " —  Adams.  10° 

The  first  victim  of  this  new  and  ' '  humaner  "  law  was  Joseph 
Southwick,  who  returned  from  banishment  in  1661,  and  in 
the  "  seventh  month  "  was  sentenced  to  its  penalty.  On 
the  trial,  Endicott  told  him  that  they  had  made  the  new  law 
"to  save  his  life,  in  mercy  to  him."  He  inquired  whether 
it  were  not  as  good  to  take  his  life  now,  as  to  whip  him  after 
their  manner,  twelve  or  fourteen  times  on  the  cart's  tail 
through  their  towns,  and  then  put  him  to  death  afterward? 
He  was  sentenced  to  be  flogged  through  Boston,  Roxbury, 
and  Dedham.  "  The  peculiar  atrocity  of  flogging  from  town 
to  town  lay  in  this  :  that  the  victim's  wounds  became  cold 
between  the  times  of  punishment,  and  in  the  winter  some- 
times frozen,  which  made  the  torture  intolerably  agonizing." 
—  Adams.m 

In  response  to  their  sentence,  Joseph  Southwick  said  : 
"  Here  is  my  body  ;  if  you  want  a  further  testimony  of  the 
truth  I  profess,  take  it  and  tear  it  in  pieces.  ...  It  is 
freely  given  up,  and  as  for  your  sentence,  I  matter  it  not." 
Then  "  they  tied  him  to  a  cart,  and  lashed  him  for  fifteen 
miles,  and  while  he  '  sang  to  the  praise  of  God,'  his  tor- 
mentor swung  with  all  his  might  a  tremendous  two-handed 
whip,  whose  knotted  thongs  were  made  of  twisted  cat-gut  ; 
thence  he  was  carried  fifteen  miles  from  any  town  into  the 
wilderness."  —  Adams. 102  And  there  they  left  him. 

In  the  middle  of  the  winter  of  1661-62,  a  Quaker  woman, 
Elizabeth  Hooton,  was  subjected  to  the  same  torture,  being 
whipped  through  Cambridge,  Watertown,  and  Dedham. 

In  1662  three  Quaker  women  fell  under  the  notice  of 
"Rev."  John  Rayner  ;  "  and  as  the  magistrate  was  ignorant 
of  the  technicalities  of  the  law,  the  elder  acted  as  clerk,  and 
drew  up  for  him  the  following  warrant :  — 

"  To  the  Constables  of  Dover,  Hampton,  Salisbury,  Newbury,  Rowley,  Ips- 
wich, Wenham,  Linn,  Boston,  Roxbury,  Dedham,  a'l^d  untill  these  vaga- 
bond Quakers  are  carried  out  of  this  jurisdiction  :  — 

100  Id.,  p.  142.  Wlld.,  pp.  148,149.  m  Id.,  p.  172. 


THE  PEOPLE  RESCUE  THE  SUFFERERS.      655 

"You  and  every  one  of  you  are  required,  in  the  king's  majesty's 
name,  to  take  these  vagabond  Quakers,  Anne  Coleman,  Mary  Tomkins, 
and  Alice  Ambrose,  and  make  them  fast  to  the  cart's  tail,  and  driving 
the  cart  through  your  several  towns,  to  whip  them  on  their  backs,  not 
exceeding  ten  stripes  apiece  on  each  of  them  in  each  town,  and  so  to 
convey  them  from  constable  to  constable,  till  they  come  out  of  this 
jurisdiction,  as  you  will  answer  it  at  your  peril  :  and  this  shall 'be  your 
warrant.  Per  me, 

' '  RICHARD  WALDEN. 

"At  Dover,  dated  December  tJte  22d,  1662." 

• 

"The  Rev.  John  Rayner  pronounced  judgement  of  death 
by  flogging  ;  for  the  weather  was  bitter,  the  distance  to  be 
walked  was  eighty  miles,  and  the  lashes  were  given  with  a 
whip,  whose  three-twisted,  knotted  thongs  cut  to  the  bone. 

"  '  So,  in  a  very  cold  day,  your  deputy,  Walden,  caused 
these  women  to  be  stripp'd  naked  from  the  middle  upward, 
and  tyed  to  a  cart,  and  after  awhile  cruelly  whipp'd  them 
whilst  the  priest  [John  Rayner],  stood  and  looked,  and 
laughed  at  it.  ...  They  went  with  the  executioner  to  Hamp- 
ton, and  through  dirt  and  snow  at  Salisbury,  half  way  the 
leg  deep;  the  constable  forced  them  after  the  cart's  tayl  at 
which  he  whipp'd  them.' 

"Had  the  Rev.  John  Rayner  but  followed  the  cart,  to 
see  that  his  three  hundred  and  thirty  lashes  were  all  given 
with  the  same  ferocity  which  warmed  his  heart  to  mirth  at 
Dover,  before  his  journey's  end  he  would  certainly  have 
joyed  in  giving  thanks  to  God  over  the  women's  gory 
corpses,  freezing  amid  the  snow.  His  negligence  saved 
their,  lives,  for  when  the  ghastly  pilgrims  passed  through 
Salisbury,  the  people,  to  their  eternal  honor,  set  the  cap- 
tives free." — Adams.™3 

There  are  many  other  instances  of  these  horrible  tort- 
ures to  both  men  and  women  ;  but  these,  without  any  men- 
tion of  the  hanging  of  witches,  are  enough  to  explain  and 
to  justify  the  deserved  and  scathing  sentence  of  the  histo- 
rian of  the  United  States,  that  "the  creation  of  a  national 
and  uncompromising  church  led  the  Congregationalists  of 

103  u  Emancipation  of  Massachusetts,"  pp.  155-157. 


656  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

Massachusetts  to  the  indulgence  of  the  passions  which  dis- 
graced their  English  persecutors,  and  Laud  was  justified  by 
the  men  whom  he  had  wronged.'1 — Bancroft.1^ 

Yet  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  legislation  with 
respect  to  the  views  of  the  Baptists  and  the  Quakers  was 
exceptional  in  its  nature  or  even  in  its  severity  ;  only,  as  the 
laws  regarding  them  were  more  openly  disregarded,  the  pen- 
alties were  inflicted  upon  them  in  greater  measure  than  upon 
any  others.  There  was  a  law  running  as  follows  :  — 

"  '  Albeit  faith  is  not  wrought  by  the  sword,  but  the  word,  neverthe- 
less, seeing  that  blasphemy  of  the  true  God  cannot  be  excused-  by  an 
ignorance  or  infirmity  of  human  nature,'  therefore,  'no  person  in  this 
jurisdiction,  whether  Christian  or  pagan,  shall  witting! y  and  willingly 
presume  to  blaspheme  his  holy  Name,  either  by  willful  or  obstinate 
denying  the  true  God,  or  his  creation  or  government  of  the  world,  or 
shall  curse  God,  or  reproach  the  holy  religion  of  God,  as  if  it  were  but  a 
public  device  to  keep  ignorant  men  in  awe,  nor  shall  utter  any  other 
eminent  kind  of  blasphemy  of  like  nature  or  degree,'  under  penalty  of 
death." 

Another  law  subjected  to  fine,  whipping,  banishment, 
and  finally  to  death,  "  any  who  denied  the  received  books 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  to  be  the  infallible  word  of 
God."—  IliWreth.™ 

Another  and  about  the  mildest  form  of  punishment  is 
shown  by  the  following  law,  enacted  in  1646  :  — 

"It  is  therefore  ordered  and  decreed,  that  if  any -Christian  (so- 
called)  within  this  jurisdiction  shall  contemptuously  behave  himself 
towards  the  word  preached  or  the  messenger  thereof  called  to  dispense 
the  same  in  any  congregation,  when  he  faithfully  executes  his  service 
and  office  therein  according  to  the  will  and  word  of  God,  either  by  in- 
terrupting him  in  his  preaching,  or  by  charging  him  falsely  with  an 
error  which  he  hath  not  taught  in  the  open  face  of  the  church,  or  like  a 
son  of  Korah,  cast  upon  his  true  doctrine  or  himself  any  reproach,  to 


IM  u  History  of  the  United  States,"  chap.  "  The  Place  of  Puritanism  in 
History,"  par.  5.  In  his  last  revision,  however,  this  is  softened  into  this  :  "  The 
uncompromising  Congregationalists  of  Massachusetts  indulged  the  passions  of 
their  English  persecutors." 

105 "  History  of  the  United  States,"  Vol.  i,  chap,  xii,  par.  1,  2. 


LAWS   OF  NEW  HAVEN  AND   CONNECTICUT.        657 

the  dishonor  of  the  Lord  Jesus  who  hath  sent  him,  and  to  the  dispar- 
agement of  that  his  holy  ordinance,  and  making  God's  ways  contemptible 
or  ridiculous,  that  every  such  person  or  persons  (whatsoever  censure  the 
church  may  pass)  shall  for  the  first  scandal,  be  convented  and  reproved 
openly  by  the  magistrate,  at  some  lecture,  and  bound  to  their  good  be- 
havior ;  and  if  a  second  time  they  break  forth  into  the  like  contemptu- 
ous carriages,  they  shall  either  pay  five  pounds  to  the  public  treasure,  or 
stand  two  hours  openly  upon  a  block  or  stool  four  foot  high,  upon  a 
lecture  day,  with  a  paper  fixed  on  his  breast,  written  with  capital  letters, 
'A  WANTON  GOSPELLER  ; '  that  others  may  fear  and  be  ashamed  of 
breaking  out  into  the  like  wickedness."  106 

Yet  Massachusetts,  though  the  worst,  was  not  by  any 
means  the  only  one,  of  the  colonies  that  had  an  established 
religion,  and  that  per-consequence  persecuted.  The  other 
Puritan  colonies  were  of  the  same  order.  Plymouth  and 
New  Haven  were  second  only  to  Massachusetts,  and  Con- 
necticut was  not  far  behind.  New  Haven  had  a  law  against 
Quakers,  ordering  that  — 

"Every  Quaker  that  comes  into  this  jurisdiction  shall  be  severely 
whipped,  and  be  kept  at  work  in  the  house  of  correction  ;  and  the 
second  time,  be  branded  in  one  hand,  and  kept  at  work  as  aforesaid ; 
the  third  time  be  branded  in  the  other  hand,  and  the  fourth  time,  to  be 
bored  through  the  tongue  with  a  red-hot  iron."  „ 

That  the  law  was  by  no  means  a  nullity,  is  seen  by  the 
fact  that  Humphrey  Norton,  merely  passing  through  South- 
bold  on  his  way  to  one  of  the  Dutch  plantations,  was  appre- 
hended, without  being  asked  whither  he  was  going,  and 
committed  to  the  marshal  1,  conveyed  to  New  Haven,  and 
there  cast  into  prison,  chained  to  a  post,  and  none  suffered 
to  visit  him  in  the  bitter  cold  winter.  .  .  .  At  length,  he 
was  had  before  the  court,  where  was  their  priest  [minis- 
ter], John  Davenport,  to  whom  Humphrey  Norton  had  sent 
some  religious  queries ;  and  the  priest  having  spoken  what 
he  pleased  in  answer  to  those  queries,  Humphrey  attempted 
to  reply,  but  was  prevented  by  their  tying  a  great  iron  key 
across  his  mouth,  so  that  he  could  not  speak.  After  that  he 
was  had  again  to  prison,  and  after  ten  days  more,  sentenced 

106 Trumbull's  "Blue  Laws,  True  and  False,"  p.  83,  with  note. 


658  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND   FALSE. 

to  be  severely  whipped,  and  burned  in  the  hand  with  the 
letter  '  H '  for  heresy,  and  to  be  sent  out  of  the  colony,  and 
not  to  return  upon  pain  of  the  utmost  penalty  they  could 
inflict  by  law,  and  to  pay  ten  pounds  jto wards  the  charge  of 
the  court  and  colony.  And  they  ordered  this  sentence  to  be 
executed  the  same  day.  Accordingly,  the  drum  was  beat, 
and  the  people  gathered  ;  '  the  poor  man  was  fetched,  and 
stripped  to  the  waist,  and  set  with  his  back  towards  the 
magistrates,  and  had  given,  in  their  view,  thirty-six  cruel 
stripes,  and  then  turned,  and  his  face  set  towards  them,  his 
hand  made  fast  in  the  stocks,  where  they  had  set  his  body 
before,  and  burned  very  deep  with  a  red-hot  iron  :  then  he 
was  sent  to  prison  again,  and  there  kept,  till  a  Dutchman,  a 
stranger  to  him,  paid  down  twenty  nobles  for  his  fine  and 
fees.'  It  was  remarkable  that  as  soon  as  he  had  suffered 
this  cruel  sentence,  and  was  let  loose  from  the  stocks,  he 
knelt  down,  and  prayed  to  the  Lord,  to  the  astonishment  of 
his  persecutors."107 

The  "Blue  Laws"  of  Connecticut  are  proverbial;  yet 
they  were  copied  almost  bodily  from  the  Massachusetts 
code.  For  instance,  the  "Wanton  Gospeller"  statute  of 
Massachusetts  was  adopted  by  Connecticut,  word  for  word, 
with  only  the  change  of  the  inscription  to  "An  Open  and 
Obstinate  Contemner  of  God's  Holy  Ordinances." 

Nor  was  it  alone  in  New  England  that  Church  and  State 
were  united.  It  was  so  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  every 
one  of  the  thirteen  original  colonies  in  America,  except  Rhode 
Island.  In  New  England  the  established  religion  was  Con- 
gregationalism, while  in  all  the  colonies  south  from  New 
York  to  Georgia,  except  only  Pennsylvania,  the  Church  of 
England  was  the  favored  one.  In  Pennsylvania  there  was 
no  union  with  any  particular  denomination  as  such,  but  no 
one  could  hold  office  or  even  vote  except  "such  as  possess 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ."  And  protection  from  compulsory  re- 
ligious observances  was  guaranteed  to  no  one,  except  those 
"who  confess  and  acknowledge  one  almighty  and  eternal 

107  Besse's  "  Sufferings  of  the  Quakers." 


JOHN  WESLEY  PROSECUTED.  659 

God  to  bo  the  Creator,  Upholder,  and  Ruler  of  the  world/' 
As  all  were  thus  required  to  be  religious,  and  to  possess 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  it  was  therefore  required  "that 
according  to  the  good  example  of  the  primitive  Christians, 
every  first  day  of  the  week,  called  the  Lord's  day,  people 
shall  abstain  from  their  common  daily  labor,  that  they  may 
the  better  dispose  themselves  to  worship  God  according  to 
their  understandings."  108 

Maryland,  while  held  by  the  Roman  Catholics,  was  freer 
than  any  other  colony,  except  Rhode  Island  ;  yet  even  there, 
as  in  Pennsylvania,  it  was  only  toleration  that  was  guaran- 
teed, and  that  only  to  persons  "  professing  to  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ."  But  in  1692  the  Episcopalians  took  possession,  and 
although  other  forms  of  religion  were  still  tolerated,  "  Protest- 
ant Episcopacy  was  established  by  law,"  and  so  continued 
until  the  Revolution. 

The  Church  and  State  system  in  Georgia,  and  even  its 
practical  working  as  late  as  1T3T,  may  be  seen  in  the  per- 
secution of  John  Wesley.  The  case  grew  out  of  Wesley's 
refusing  the  sacrament  to  certain  women,  and  this  was  made 
only  the  opportunity  to  vent  their  spite  upon  him  in  what- 
ever else  they  could  trump  up.  The  first  step  was  taken 
thus  :  — 

"  GEORGIA.     SAVANNAH  ss. 

"To  all  Constables,  Tythingmen,  and  others  whom  these  may  con- 
cern :  You  and  each  of  you  are  hereby  required  to  take  the  body  of  John 
Wesley,  clerk,  and  bring  him  before  one  of  the  bailiffs  of  the  said  town, 
to  answer  the  complaint  of  William  Williamson  and  Sophia  his  wife,  for 
defaming  the  said  Sophia,  and  refusing  to  administer  to  her  the  sacrament 
of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  a  publick  congregation,  without  cause  ;  by  which 
the  said  William  Williamson  is  damag'd  one  thousand  pound  sterling. 
And  for  so  doing,  this  is  your  warrant,  certifying  what  you  are  to  do  in 
the  premises.  Given  under  my  hand  and  seal  the  eighth  day  of  August, 
Anno  Dom.,  1737.  Tuo.  CHRISTIE." 

Wesley  was  arrested,  and  brought  before  the  recorder  for 
examination.  When  questioned  upon  this  matter,  he  re- 

108  u  Charters  and  Coristitutions,"  Pennsylvania. 


660  PROTESTANTISM— TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

plied  that  "the  giving  or  refusing  the  Lord's  Supper  being 
a  matter  purely  ecclesiastical,  I  could  not  acknowledge  their 
power  to  interrogate  me  upon  it."  The  case  was  deferred  to 
the  next  regular  sitting  of  the  court.  When  the  court  con- 
vened, the  judge  charged  the  grand  jury  to  "  beware  of 
spiritual  tyranny,  and  to  oppose  the  new  illegal  authority 
that  was  usurped  over  their  consciences."  The  grand  jury, 
says  "Wesley,  was  thus  composed  :  "  One  was  a  Frenchman 
who  did  not  understand  English,  one  a  Papist,  one  a  profest 
infidel,  three  Baptists,  sixteen  or  seventeen  others,  dissenters, 
and  several  others  who  had  personal  quarrels  against  me, 
and  had  openly  vow'd  revenge." 

A  majority  of  this  grand  jury  framed  an  indictment  of 
ten  counts,  as  follows  :  — 

"  That  John  "Wesley,  clerk,  has  broken  the  laws  of  the  realm,  con- 
trary to  the  peace  of  our  sovereign  lord  the  king,  his  crown  and  dignity. 

"1.  By  speaking  and  writing  to  Mrs.  Williamson  against  her  hus- 
band's consent. 

"  2.  By  repelling  her  from  the  holy  communion. 

"3.  By  not  declaring  his  adherence  to  the  Church  of  England. 

"4.  By  dividing  the  morning  service  on  Sundays. 

"5.  By  refusing  to  baptize  Mr.  Parker's  child  otherwise  than  by 
dipping,  except  the  parents  would  certify  it  was  weak,  and  not  able  to 
bear  it. 

"6.   By  repelling  Wm.  Gough  from  the  holy  communion. 

"  7.  By  refusing  tq  read  the  burial  service  over  the  body  of  Nathaniel 
Polhill. 

"  8.  By  calling  himself  ordinary  of  Savannah. 

"  9.  By  refusing  to  receive  Wm.  Agliorly  as  a  godfather,  only  be- 
cause he  was  not  a  communicant. 

"  10.  By  refusing  Jacob  Matthews  for  the  same  reason,  and  baptizing 
an  Indian  trader's  child  with  only  two  sponsors. 

The  prosecution  was  made  to  drag  along  with  Wesley 
neither  convicted  nor  acquitted,  but  held,  as"  he  describes  it, 
as  a  sort  of  "prisoner  at  large,"  until,  willing  to  bear  it  no 
longer,  he  determined  to  go  back  to  England.  That  he 
should  leave  Georgia  and  go  somewhere  was  just  what  the 
Georgians  wanted,  and  although  a  pretense  of  opposing  his 


MARTIN  LUTHER  AND  ROGER    WILLIAMS,  061 

going  was  made,  they  were  glad  when  he  left,  December  2, 

1737.109 

Of  the  Southern  colonies,  Virginia  took  the  lead,  and 
was  next  to  Massachusetts  in  intolerance  and  persecution. 
The  colony  was  divided  into  parishes,  and  all  the  inhabitants 
were  taxed  to  maintain  the  worship  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
All  the  people  were  required  to  attend  the  churches  of  the 
establishment.  The  rights  of  citizenship  were  dependent 
upon  membership  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  Whoever  failed 
to  attend  church  any  Sunday  "without  an  allowable  excuse," 
was  to  be  fined  one  pound  of  tobacco,  and  if  any  one  should 
be  absent  from  Sunday  service  for  a  month,  the  fine  was 
fifty  pounds  of  tobacco. 

Virginia,  however,  though  standing  in  the  lead  of  the 
Southern  colonies  in  the  severity  of  its  religious  legislation, 
was  the  first  of  all  the  colonies  to  separate  Church  and  State, 
and  to  declare  and  secure  by  statute  the  religious  rights  of 
all  men. 

From  this  review  of  Protestantism,  it  plainly  appears 
that  after  Martin  Luther,  until  the  rise  of  Roger  Williams, 
not  a  single  Reformer  preached  in  sincerity  the  principles  of 
Christianity  and  of  Protestantism  as  to  the  rights  of  con- 
science, and  that  in  not  a  single  place  except  the  colony  of 
Rhode  Island,  was  there  even  recognized,  much  less  exem- 
plified, the  Christian  and  Protestant  principle  of  the  separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State,  of  the  religious  and  civil  powers. 

Throughout  this  whole  period  we  find  that  in  all  the  dis- 
cussions, and  all  the  work,  of  the  professed  champions  of 
the  rights  of  conscience,  there  everywhere  appears  the  fatal 
defect  that  it  was  only  their  own  rights  of  conscience  that 
they  either  asserted  or  defended.  In  other  words,  their 
argument  simply  amounted  to  this  :  It  is  our  inalienable 


109 "John  Wesley  a  Missioner  to  Georgia,"  by  William  Stevens  Perry,  D.  D., 
bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  Iowa  ;  New  York  Independent, 
March  5,  1891,  pp.  5,  6. 

50 


662  PROTESTANTISM—  TRUE  AND  FALSE. 

right  to  believe  and  worship  as  we  choose.  It  is  likewise 
our  inalienable  right  to  compel  everybody  else  to  believe 
and  worship  as  we  choose. 

But  this  is  no  assertion  at  all  of  the  rights  of  conscience. 
The  true  principle  and  assertion  of  the  rights  of  conscience 
is  not  our  assertion  of  our  right  to  believe  and  worship  as 
we  choose.  This  always  leaves  the  way  open  for  the  addi- 
tional assertion  of  our  right  to  compel  others  to  believe  and 
worship  as  we  choose,  should  occasion  seem  to  demand  ;  and 
there  are  a  multitude  of  circumstances  that  are  ever  ready 
strongly  to  urge  that  occasion  does  demand. 

The  true  principle  and  the  right  assertion  of  the  rights  of 
conscience  is  our  assertion  of  every  other  man's  right  to  be- 
lieve and  worship  as  he  chooses,  or  not  to  worship  at  all  if 
lie  chooses.  This  at  once  sweeps  away  every  excuse  and 
every  argument  that  might  ever  be  offered  for  the  restriction 
or  the  invasion  of  the  rights  of  conscience  by  any  person  or 
any  power. 

This  is  the  Christian  doctrine.  This  is  the  Roger  Wil- 
liams doctrine.  This  is  the  genuine  Protestant  doctrine,  for 
it  is  "  the  logical  consequence  of  either  of  the  two  great  dis- 
tinguishing principles  of  the  Reformation,  as  well  of  justifica- 
tion by  faith  alone  as  of  the  equality  of  all  believers."  — 
Bancroft.  no 

In  the  promulgation  of  the  principles  of  Protestantism, 
and  in  the  work  of  the  Reformation,  the  names  of  MARTIN 
LUTHER  and  ROGER  WILLIAMS  can  never  rightly  be  sepa- 
rated. Williams  completed  what  Luther  began  ;  and  to- 
gether they  gave  anew  to  the  world,  and  for  all  time,  the 
principles  originally  announced  by  Him  who  was  the  Author 
and  Finisher  of  the  faith  of  both  —  JESUS  CHRIST,  THE 
AUTHOR  OF  RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY. 


110  "  History   of    the   United    States,"  chap.  "  Self-Government   in  Massa- 
chusetts," par.  23. 


§ 

I—  I 

EH 

< 
M 


W 

H 


K 


CHAPTER   XXIV, 


THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

came  the  American  Revolution,  overturning  all 
i.  the  principles  of  the  papacy,  and  establishing  for  the 
enlightenment  of  all  nations,  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC, —  the  first 
national  government  upon  the  earth  that  accords  with  the 
principles  announced  by  Jesus  Christ  for  mankind  and  for 
civil  government. 

The  American  Revolution  did  not  consist  in  the  establish- 
ment of  a  government  independent  of  Great  Britain,  but  in 
the  ideas  concerning  man  and  government  that  were  pro- 
claimed and  established  by  it.  This  Revolution  is  the  ex- 
pression of  two  distinct  ideas.  First,  that  government  is  of 
the  people  ;  and,  second,  that  government  is  of  right  entirely 
separate  from  religion. 

The  first  decided  step  in  this  grand  revolution  was 
taken  when  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was  signed. 
That  immortal  document  declares  :  — 

"We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident,  that  all  men  are  created 
equal ;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  unalienable 
rights  ;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness. 
That  to  secure  these  rights,  governments  are  instituted  among  men, 
deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed  ;  that 
whenever  any  form  of  government  becomes  destructive  of  these  ends, 
it  is  the  right  of  the  people  to  alter  or  to  abolish  it,  and  to  institute  a 
new  government,  laying  its  foundation  on  such  principles,  and  organiz- 
ing its  powers  in  such  form,  as  to  them  shall  seem  most  likely  to  effect 
their  safety  and  happiness." 

Thus  in  two  sentences  was  annihilated  the  despotic 
doctrine  which,  springing  from  the  usurped  authority  of  the 

[663] 


664  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

papacy,  to  sit  in  the  place  of  God  and  to  set  up  and  pull 
down  kings,  and  to  bestow  kingdoms  and  empires  at  its  will, 
had  now  become  venerable,  if  not  absolutely  hallowed,  by 
the  precedents  of  a  thousand  years — the  doctrine  of  the 
divine  right  of  kings  ;  and  in  the  place  of  the  old,  false, 
despotic  theory  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  government  and 
the  subjection  of  the  people,  there  was  declared  the  self- 
evident  truth,  the  subjection  of  government,  and  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people. 

In  declaring  the  equal  and  inalienable  right  of  all  men 
to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness,  and  that  gov- 
ernments derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the 
governed,  there  is  not  only  declared  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people,  but  also  the  entire  capability  of  the  people.  The 
declaration,  in  itself,  presupposes  that  men  are  men  indeed, 
and  that  as  such  they  are  fully  capable  of  deciding  for  them- 
selves as  to  what  is  best  for  their  happiness,  and  how  they 
shall  pursue  it,  without  the  government's  being  set  up  as  a 
parent  or  guardian  to  deal  with  them  as  with  children. 

In  declaring  that  governments  are  instituted  by  the  gov- 
erned, for  certain  ends,  and  that  when  any  government 
becomes  destructive  of  these  ends,  it  is  the  right  of  the 
people  to  alter  or  to  abolish  it,  and  to  institute  a  new  govern- 
ment, in  such  form  as  to  them  shall  seem  most  likely  to 
effect  their  safety  and  happiness,  it  is  likewise  declared  that 
instead  of  the  people's  needing  to  be  cared  for  by  the  gov- 
ernment, the  government  must  he  cared  for  hy  the  people. 

This  is  confirmed  by  the  national  Constitution,  which 
is  but  the  complement  of  the  Declaration.  Thus  says  — 

THE    PREAMBLE  I 

"  We,  tJie  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect 
union,  establish  justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the 
common  defense,  promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings 
of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and  establish  this 
Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America." 


CIVIL    GOVERNMENT   WHOLLY  IMPERSONAL.         665 

And  Article  IX  of  Amendments  says  :  — 

"The  enumeration  in  the  Constitution  of  certain  rights  shall  not  be 
construed  to  deny  or  disparage  others  retained  by  the  people. 

And  Article  X  of  Amendments  says  :  — 

"  The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  this  Constitution, 
nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively, 
or  to  tlie  people." 

In  declaring  the  objects  of  government  to  be  to  secure 
to  the  people  the  rights  which  they  already  possess  in  full 
measure  and  inalienable  degree,  and  to  effect  their  safety 
and  happiness  in  the  enjoyment  of  those  rights  ;  and  in 
declaring  the  right  of  the  people,  in  the  event  named,  to 
alter  or  abolish  the  government  which  they  have,  and  insti- 
tute a  new  one  on  such  principles  and  in  such  form  as  to 
them  seems  best ;  there  is  likewise  declared  not  only  the 
complete  subordination  but  also  the  absolute  impersonality 
of  government.  It  is  therein  declared  that  the  government 
is  but  a  device,  a  piece  of  political  machinery,  framed  and 
set  up  by  the  people,  by  which  they  would  make  themselves 
secure  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  inalienable  rights  which  they 
already  possess  as  men,  and  which  they  have  by  virtue  of 
being  men  in  society  and  not  by  virtue  of  government ;  — 
the  right  which  was  theirs  before  government  was  ;  which  is 
their  own  in  the  essential  meaning  of  the  term  ;  and  ' '  which 
they  do  not  hold  by  any  sub-infeudation,  but  by  direct  hom- 
age and  allegiance  to  the  Owner  and  Lord  of  all "  (Stanley 
Matthews  *),  their  Creator,  who  has  endowed  them  with  those 
rights.  And  in  thus  declaring  the  impersonality  of  govern- 
ment, there  is  wholly  uprooted  every  vestige  of  any 
character  of  paternity  in  the  government. 

In  declaring  the  equality  of  all  men  in  the  possession  of 
these  inalienable  rights,  there  is  likewise  declared  the  strong- 

xln  Argument  In  Cincinnati  Case,  Minor  et  al,  on  "Bible  In  the  Public 
Schools,"  p.  241. 


666  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

est  possible  safeguard  of  the  people.  For  this  being  the  dec- 
laration of  the  people,  each  one  of  the  people  stands  thereby 
pledged  to  the  support  of  the  principle  thus  declared.  There- 
fore, each  individual  is  pledged,  in  the  exercise  of  his  own 
inalienable  right  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness, so  to  act  as  not  to  interfere  with  any  other  person  in  the 
free  and  perfect  exercise  of  his  inalienable  right  to  life,  lib- 
erty, and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  Any  person  who  so  acts 
as  to  restrict  or  interfere  with  the  free  exercise  of  any  other 
person's  right  to  life,  or  liberty,  or  the  pursuit  of  happiness, 
denies  the  principle,  to  the  maintenance  of  which  he  is 
pledged,  and  does  in  effect  subvert  the  government.  For, 
rights  being  equal,  if  one  may  so  act,  every  other  one  may 
do  so  ;  and  thus  no  man's  right  is  recognized,  government 
is  gone,  and  only  anarchy  remains.  Therefore,  by  every 
interest,  personal  as  well  as  general,  private  as  well  as  pub- 
lic, every  individual  among  the  people  is  pledged  in  the  en- 
joyment of  his  right  to  life,  or  liberty,  or  the  pursuit  of 
happiness,  so  to  conduct  himself  as  not  to  interfere  in  the 
least  degree  with  the  equal  right  of  every  other  one  to  the 
free  and  full  exercise  of  his  enjoyment  of  life,  liberty,  and 
the  pursuit  of  happiness.  "For  the  rights  of  man,  as  man, 
must  be  understood  in  a  sense  that  can  admit  of  no  single 
exception  ;  for  to  allege  an  exception  is  the  same  thing  as  to 
deny  the  principle."  We  reject,  therefore,  with  scorn,  any 
profession  of,  respect  to  the  principle  which,  in  fact,  comes 
to  us  clogged  and  contradicted  by  a  petition  for  an  excep- 
tion. .  .  .  To  profess  the  principle  and  then  to  plead  for  an 
exception,  let  the  plea  be  what  it  may,  is  to  deny  the  prin- 
ciple, and  it  is  to  utter  a  treason  against  humanity.  The 
rights  of  man  must  everywhere  all  the  world  over  be  recog- 
nized and  respected." — Isaac  Taylor? 

The  Declaration  of  Independence,  therefore,  announces 
the  perfect  principle  of  civil  government.  If  the  principle 
thus  announced  were  perfectly  conformed  to  by  all,  then  the 
government  would  be  a  perfect  civil  government.  It  is  but 

2  Quoted  by  Stanley  Matthews,  Id.,  p.  243. 


IT  IS   THE  SCRIPTURAL  IDEA.  667 

the  principle  of  self-government  —  government  of  the  peo- 
ple, by  the  people,  and  for  the  people.  And  to  the  extent 
to  which  this  principle  is  exemplified  among  the  people,  to 
the  extent  to  which  the  individual  governs  himself,  just  to  that 
extent  and  no  further  will  prevail  the  true  idea  of  the  Dec- 
laration, and  the  republic  which  it  created. 

Such  is  the  first  grand  idea  of  the  American  Revolution. 
And  it  is  the  scriptural  idea,  the  idea  of  Jesus  Christ  and  of 
God.  Let  this  be  demonstrated. 

The  Declaration  holds  that  all  men  are  endowed  by  their 
Creator  with  certain  inalienable  rights,  and  that  to  secure 
these  rights,  governments  are  instituted  among  men  deriv- 
ing their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed. 
Now  the  Creator  of  all  men  is  the  God  and  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  "is  he  the  God  of  the  Jews  only? 
is  he  not  also  of  the  Gentiles  \  Yes,  of  the  Gentiles  also.'1 
And  as  he  "  hath  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men  for 
to  dwell  on  all  the  face  of  the  earth"  (Acts  xvii,  26),  "there 
is  no  respect  of  persons  with  God."  Rom.  ii,  11.  Nor  is 
this  the  doctrine  of  the  later  scripture  only  ;  it  is  the  doc- 
trine of  all  the  Book.  The  most  ancient  writings  in  the 
Book  have  these  words :  "IM  did  despise  the  cause  of  my 
man-servant  or  of  my  maid-servant  when  they  contended 
with  rne  ;  what  then  shall  I  do  when  God  riseth  up  ?  and 
when  he  visiteth,  what  shall  I  answer  him  ?  Did  not  he 
that  made  me  in  the  womb,  make  him  ? "  Job  xxxi,  13- 
15.  And,  "The  Lord  your  God  is  God  of  gods,  and  Lord 
of  lords,  a  great  God,  a  mighty  and  a  terrible,  which  re- 
gardeth  not  persons,  nor  taketh  reward  :  he  doth  execute 
the  judgment  of  the  fatherless  and  widow,  and  loveth  the 
stranger  in  giving  him  food  and  raiment.  Love  ye  there- 
fore the  stranger."  "The  stranger  that  dwelleth  with 
you,  shall  be  unto  you  as  one  born  among  you,  and 
thou  shalt  love  him  as  thyself."  Deut.  x,  17-19  ;  Lev. 
xix,  34. 

All  men  are  indeed  created  equal,  and  are  endowed  by 
their  Creator  with  certain  inalienable  rights. 


668  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

As  to  civil  government,  the  Scripture  commands,  "  Ren- 
der to  Caesar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's  ; "  and  Christ 
himself  paid  tribute  to  Caesar,  "thus  recognizing  the  right- 
fulness  of  civil  government  to  be."  But  more  than  this,  it 
is  plainly  declared,  "The  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of 
God."  Rom.  xiii,  1.  This  scripture  has  long  been  used  to 
sustain  the  papal  fable  of  the  divine  right  of  kings,  but  such 
use  was  always  only  a  perversion.  It  is  proper  and  inter- 
esting to  have  a  scriptural  answer  to  the  question.  How 
then  are  the  powers  that  be  ordained  of  God  ?  And  to  this 
question,  the  Scriptures  do  give  a  clear  answer. 

Let  us  read  :  "In  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Jehoiakim,  the  son  of  Josiah  king  of  Judah,  came  this 
word  unto  Jeremiah  from  the  Lord,  saying,  Thus  saith  the 
Lord  to  me  :  Make  thee  bonds  and  yokes,  and  put  them 
upon  thy  neck,  and  send  them  to  the  king  of  Edom,  and  to 
the  king  of  Moab,  and  to  the  king  of  the  Ammonites,  and  to 
the  king  of  Tyrus,  and  to  the  king  of  Zidon,  by  the  hand  of 
the  messengers  which  come  to  Jerusalem  unto  Zedekiah 
king  of  Judah,  and  command  them  to  say  unto  their  masters, 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel :  Thus  shall 
ye  say  unto  your  masters  :  I  rTave  made  the  earth,  the  man 
and  the  beasts  that  are  upon  the  ground,  by  my  great  power 
and  by  my  outstretched  arm,  and  have  given  it  unto  whom 
it  seemed  meet  unto  me.  And  now  have  I  given  all  these 
lands  into  the  hand  of  Nebuchadezzar  the  king  of  Babylon, 
my  servant ;  and  the  beasts  of  the  field  have  I  given  him 
also  to  serve  him.  And  all  nations  shall  serve  him,  and  his 
son,  and  his  son's  son,  until  the  very  time  of  his  land  come, 
and  then  many  nations  and  great  kings  shall  serve  them- 
selves of  him.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  the  nation 
and  kingdom  which  will  not  serve  the  same  Nebuchadnezzar 
the  king  of  Babylon,  and  that  will  not  put  their  neck  under 
the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  that  nation  will  I  punish,, 
saith  the  Lord,  with  the  sword,  and  with  the  famine,  and  with 
the  pestilence,  until  I  have  consumed  them  by  his  hand." 


HOW  ARE  THE  POWERS  THAT  BE,   ORDAINED?        C69 

In  this  scripture  it  is  clearly  shown  that  the  power  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  was  ordained  of  God  : 
nor  to  Nebuchadnezzar  alone,  but  to  his  son  and  his  son's 
son  :  which  is  to  say  that  the  power  of  the  Babylonian  em- 
pire, as  an  imperial  power,  was  ordained  of  God.  Neb- 
uchadnezzar was  plainly  called  by  the  Lord,  "  My  servant  ;  " 
and  the  Lord  says,  "  And  now  have  /given  all  these  lands 
into  the  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  of  Babylon." 
He  further  says  that  whatever  "nation  and  kingdom  which 

«/ 

will  not  serve  the  same  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  of  Baby- 
lon, and  that  will  not  put  their  neck  under  the  yoke  of  the 
king  of  Babylon,  that  nation  will  I  punish." 

Another  instance  :  In  the  above  scripture  it  is  stated 
that  the  power  of  Babylon  should  continue  through  Nebuchad- 
nezzar and  his  son  and  to  his  son's  son,  and  that  all  nations 
should  serve  Babylon  until  that  time,  and  that  then  nations 
and  kings  should  serve  themselves  of  him.  Other  prophecies 
"show  that  Babylon  was  then  to  be  destroyed.  Jer.  li,  28 
says  that  the  king  of  the  Medes,  and  all  his  land,  with  the 
captains  and  rulers,  should  be  prepared  against  Babylon  to 
destroy  it.  Isa.  xxi,  2  shows  that  Persia  (Elam)  should  ac- 
company Media  in  the  destruction  of  Babylon.  Isa.  xlv, 
1—4  names  Cyrus  as  the  leader  of  the  forces,  more  than  a 
hundred  years  before  he  was  born,  and  one  hundred  and 
seventy-four  years  before  the  time.  And  of  Cyrus,  the 
prophet  said  from  the  Lord,  "I  have  raised  him  up  in  right- 
eousness, and  I  will  direct  all  his  ways  ;  he  shall  build  my 
city,  and  he  shall  let  go  my  captives,  not  for  price,  nor  re- 
ward, saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  Isa.  xlv,  13.  But  in  the 
conquest  of  Babylon,  Cyrus  was  only  the  leader  of  the  forces. 
The  kingdom  and  rule  were  given  to  Darius  the  Mede  ;  for, 
said  Daniel  to  Belshazzar,  on  the  night  when  Babylon  fell, 
"Thy  kingdom  is  divided,  and  given  to  the  Medes  and 
Persians."  Then  the  record  proceeds  :  "In  that  night  was 
Belshazzar  the  king  of  the  Chaldeans  slain.  And  Darius  the 
Median  took  the  kingdom."  Of  him  we  read  in  Dan.  xi,  1, 


670  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

the  words  of  the  angel  Gabriel  to  the  prophet  :  "I,  in  the 
first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,  even  I,  stood  to  confirm  and 
to  strengthen  him." 

There  can  be  no  dispute,  therefore,  that  the  power  of 
Babylon,  as  exercised  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  succes- 
sors, and  that  of  Medo-Persia  as  exercised  by  Darius  and 
Cyrus  and  their  successors,  was  ordained  of  God.  It  would 
be  easy  to  follow  the  same  truth  onward  to  the  power  of 
Grecia,  in  Alexander  and  his  successors,  and  to  Rome,  as 
indeed  it  was  Nero  who  was  emperor  when  this  letter  was 
written  to  the  Christians  at  Rome,  in  which  is  this  declara- 
tion that  "  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God." 

Was  then  the  powrer  exercised  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
his  successors  unto  Nero  —  was  this  power  bestowed  upon 
any  of  these  directly,  or  in  a  miraculous  way  ? 

Did  God  send  a  prophet  or  a  priest  to  anoint  any  of 
these  rulers  to  be  king  or  emperor  ?  or  did  he  send  a  heav- 
enly messenger,  as  he  did  to  Moses  and  to  Gideon?  — 
Neither.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  king  because  he  was  the  son 
of  his  father,  who  had  been  king.  How  then  did  his  father 
become  king?  In  625  B.  c.,  Babylonia  was  but  one  province 
of  the  empire  of  Assyria  ;  Media  was  another.  Both  re- 
volted, and  at  the  same  time.  The  king  of  Assyria  gave 
Nabopolassar  command  of  a  large  force,  and  sent  him  to 
Babylonia  to  quell  the  revolt,  while  he  himself  led  other 
forces  into  Media,  to  put  down  the  insurrection  there. 
Nabopolassar  did  his  work  so  well  in  Babylonia  that  the 
king  of  Assyria  rewarded  him  with  the  command  of  that 
province,  with  the  title  of  king  of  Babylon. 

Thus  Nabopolassar  received  his  power  from  the  king  of 
Assyria.  The  king  of  Assyria  received  his  from  his  father, 
Asshur-bani-pal  ;  Asshur-bani-pal  received  his  from  his 
father,  Esar-haddon ;  Esar-haddon  received  his  from  his 
father,  Sennacherib  ;  Sennacherib  received  his  from  his 
father,  Sargon  ;  and  Sargon  received  his  from  the  troops  in 
the  field,  that  is.  from  the  people  ;  for  the  army  of  Assyria 


THE  AMERICAN  DOCTRINE  IS  SCRIPTURAL.         671 

was  not  a  standing  army,  as  those  of  modern  nations  are, 
but  it  was  the  male  portion  of  the  nation  itself,  at  war.  Thus 
it  was,  and  thus  only,  that  the  power  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
his  son  and  his  sou's  son,  was  ordained  of  God.  It  was 
simply  providential,  and  was  brought  about  and  worked  out 
as  is  anything  and  everything  else  in  the  realm  of  the  provi- 
dence of  God.  It  was  so,  likewise,  with  all  the  others.  And 
it  has  always  been  so  in  every  case,  in  every  government, 
that  ever  was  on  earth,  except  only  in  the  nation  of  Israel. 

Yet  more  than  this,  except  in  the  nation  of  Israel,  it  is 
not,  and  never  has  been,  personal  sovereigns  in  themselves 
that  have  been  referred  to  in  the  statement  that  "  the  powers 
that  be  are  ordained  of  God."  It  is  not  the  persons  that  be 
in  power,  but  the  powers  that  be  in  the  person,  that  are 
ordained  of  God.  The  inquiry  of  Rom.  xiii,  3,  is  not, 
Wilt  thou  then  not  be  afraid  of  the  person  ?  But  it  is, 
' '  "Wilt  thou  then  not  be  afraid  of  the  power  ?  "  It  is  not 
the  person,  therefore,  but  the  power  that  is  represented  in 
the  person,  that  is  under  consideration  here.  And  that 
person  derives  his  power  from  the  people,  as  is  clearly  proved 
by  the  scriptural  examples  and  references  given. 

And  this  is  the  American  doctrine, —  the  doctrine  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence.  In  the  discussions  which 
brought  forth  the  Declaration  and  developed  the  Revolution, 
the  doctrine  found  expression  in  the  following  forceful  and 
eloquent  words  :  "  Government  is  founded  not  on  force,  as 
was  the  theory  of  Hobbes  ;  nor  on  compact,  as  was  the 
theory  of  Locke  and  of  the  revolution  of  1688  ;  nor  on 
property,  as  was  asserted  by  Harrington.  It  springs  from 
the  necessities  of  our  nature,  and  has  an  everlasting  founda- 
tion in  the  unchangeable  will  of  God.  Man  came  into  the 
world  and  into  society  at  the  same  instant.  There  must 
exist  in  every  earthly  society  a  supreme  sovereign,  from 
whose  final  decision  there  can  be  no  appeal  but  directly  to 
heaven.  This  supreme  power  is  originally  and  ultimately  in 
the  people  ;  and  the  people  never  did  in  fact  freely,  nor  can 


672  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

rightfully,  make  an  unlimited  renunciation  of  this  divine 
right.  Kingcraft  and  priestcraft  are  a  trick  to  gull  the 
vulgar.  The  happiness  of  mankind  demands  that  this  grand 
and  ancient  alliance  should  be  broken  off  forever. 

"The  omniscient  and  omnipotent  Monarch  of  the  uni- 
verse has,  by  the  grand  charter  given  to  the  human  race, 
placed  the  end  of  government  in  the  good  of  the  whole. 
The  form  of  government  is  left  to  the  individuals  of  each 
society  ;  its  whole  superstructure  and  administration  should 
be  conformed  to  the  law  of  universal  reason.  There  can  be 
no  prescription  old  enough  to  supersede  the  law  of  nature 
and  the  grant  of  God  Almighty,  who  has  given  all  men  a 
right  to  be  free.  If  every  prince  since  Nimrod  had  been  a 
tyrant,  it  would  not  prove  a  right  to  tyrannize.  The  admin- 
istrators of  legislative  and  executive  authority,  when  they 
verge  toward  tyranny,  are  to  be  resisted  ;  if  they  prove,  in- 
corrigible, are  to  be  deposed. 

"  The  first  principle  and  great  end  of  government  being 
to  provide  for  the  best  good  of  all  the  people,  this  can  be 
done  only  by  a  supreme  legislative  and  executive,  ultimately 
in  the  people,  or  whole  community,  where  God  has  placed 
it  ;  but  the  difficulties  attending  a  universal  congress,  gave 
rise  to  a  right  of  representation.  Such  a  transfer  of  the 
power  of  the  whole  to  a  few  was  necessary  ;  but  to  bring  the 
powers  of  all  into  the  hands  of  one  or  some  few,  and  to  make 
them  hereditary,  is  the  interested  work  of  the  weak  and  the 
wicked.  Nothing  but  life  and  liberty  are  actually  heredi- 
tablc.  The  grand  political  problem  is  to  invent  the  best 
combination  of  the  powers  of  legislation  and  execution!' 
They  must  exist  in  the  State,  just  as  in  the  revolution  of  the 
planets  ;  one  power  would  fix  them  to  a  center,  and  another 
carry  them  off  indefinitely  ;  but  the  first  and  simple  prin- 
ciple is,  EQUALITY  and  THE  POWER  OF  THE  WHOLE.  .  .  . 

"The  British  colonists  do  not  hold  their  liberties  or  their 
lands  by  so  slippery  a  tenure  as  the  will  of  the  prince. 
Colonists  are  men,  the  common  children  of  the  same  Crea- 


THE  DECLARATION  ASSERTS   THE    TRUTH.  673 

tor  with  their  brethren  of  Great  Britain.  The  colonists  are 
men  :  the  colonists  are  therefore  freeborn  ;  for,  by  the  law 
of  nature,  all  men  are  freeborn,  white  or  black.  '  No  good 
reason  can  be  given  for  enslaving  those  of  any  color.  Is  it 
right  to  enslave  a  man  because  his  color  is  black,  or  his  hair 
short  and  curled  like  wool,  instead  of  Christian  hair  ?  Can 
any  logical  inference  in  favor  of  slavery  be  drawn  from  a 
flat  nose  or  a  long  or  short  face?  The  riches  of  the  West 
Indies,  or  the  luxury  of  the  metropolis,  should  not  have 
weight  to  break  the  balance  of  truth  and  justice.  Liberty  is 
the  gift  of  God,  and  cannot  be  annihilated. 

' '  Nor  do  the  political  and  civil  rights  of  the  British  colo- 
nists rest  on  a  charter  from  the  crown.  Old  Magna  Charta 
was  not  the  beginning  of  all  things,  nor  did  it  rise  on  the 
borders  of  chaos  out  of  the  unformed  mass.  A  time  may 
come  when  Parliament  shall  declare  every  American  charter 
void  ;  but  the  natural,  inherent,  and  inseparable  rights  of 
the  colonists,  as  men  and  as  citizens,  can  never  be 
abolished.  .  .  .  The  world  is  at  the  eve  of  the  highest 
scene  of  earthly  power  and  grandeur  that  has  ever  yet  been 
displayed  to  the  view  of  mankind.  Who  will  win  the  prize, 
is  with  God.  But  human  nature  must  and  will  be  rescued 
from  the  general  slavery  that  has  so  long  triumphed  over 
the  species."  —James  Otis.3 

Thus  spoke  an  American  "for  his  country  and  for  the 
race,"  bringing  to  "the  conscious  intelligence  of  the  people 
the  elemental  principles  of  free  government  and  human 
rights."  Outside  of  the  theocracy  of  Israel,  there  never 
has  been  a  ruler  or  an  executive  on  earth  whose  authority 
was  not,  primarily  or  ultimately,  expressly  or  permissively, 
derived  from  the  people. 

It  is  not  particular  sovereigns  whose  power  is  ordained  of 
God,  nor  any  particular  form  of  government.  It  is  the 
geniiis  of  government  itself.  The  absence  of  government  is 

3  Quoted  iii  Bancroft's  "  History  of  the  United  States,"  Vol.  iii,  chap.  Til, 
par.  14-21. 


674  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

anarchy.  Anarchy  is  only  governmental  confusion.  But 
says  the  scripture,  ''God  is  not  the  author  of  confusion." 
God  is  the4  God  of  order.  He  has  ordained  order,  and  he 
has  put  within  man  himself  that  idea  of  government,  of 
self-protection,  which  is  the  first  law  of  nature,  and  which 
organizes  itself  into  forms  of  one  kind  or  another,  wherever 
men  dwell  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  And  it  is  for  men 
themselves  to  say  what  shall  be  the  form  of  government 
under  which  they  will  dwell.  One  people  has  one  form  ; 
another  has  another.  This  genius  of  civil  order  springs 
from  God  ;  it  matters  not  whether  it  be  exercised  through 
one  form  of  government  or  through  another,  the  govern- 
mental power  and  order  thus  exercised  is  ordained  of  God. 
If  the  people  choose  to  change  their  form  of  government,  it 
is  still  the  same  power  ;  it  is  to  be  respected  still,  because  in 
its  legitimate  exercise,  it  is  still  ordained  of  God. 

It  is  demonstrated,  therefore,  that  where  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  says  that  governments  derive  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed,  it  asserts  THE 

ETERNAL    TRUTH    OF    GoD. 

The  second  grand  idea  of  the  American  Revolution  — 
that  government  is  of  right  entirely  separate  from  religion 
—  is  the  logical  sequence  of  the  first. 

RELIGION  is  defined  as  "the  recognition  of  God  as  an 
object  of  worship,  love,  and  obedience."  And  again,  as 
"man's  personal  relation  of  faith  and  obedience  to  God." 
And  the  first  governmental  definition  of  the  word  in  the 
United  States,  declared  that  "-religion"  is  "the  duty  which 
we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the  manner  of  discharging  it." 

Now  governments  deriving  their  just  powers  from  the 
consent  of  the  governed,  can  never  of  right  exercise  any 
power  not  delegated  by  the  governed.  But  religion  pertain- 
ing solely  to  man's  relation  to  God,  and  the  duty  which  he 
owes  to  his  Creator,  in  the  nature  of  things  can  never  be 
delegated.  It  is  utterly  impossible  for  any  person  ever,  in 
any  degree,  to  transfer  to  another  any  relationship  to  God 


GOVERNMENT  AND  RELIGION  RIGHTLY  8EPARA  TE.     675 

or  any  duty  which  he  owes  to  his  Creator.  To  attempt  to 
do  so  would  be  to  deny  God  and  renounce  religion,  and 
even  then  the  thing  would  not  be  done  —  his  relationship 
to  God  would  still  abide  as  firmly  as  ever. 

Logically  and  rightfully,  therefore,  the  government  of 
the  United  States  disavows  any  jurisdiction  or  power  in 
things  religious.  Religion  is  not,  and  never  can  rightly  be 
made,  in  any  sense  a  requisite  to  the  governmental  authority 
of  the  United  States,  because  the  supreme  law  declares 
that- 

"  No  religious  test  shall  ever  be  required  as  a  qualification  to  any  office 
or  public  trust  under  the  United  States."4 

The  government  cannot  rightly  legislate  in  any  sense 
upon  matters  of  religion,  because  the  supreme  law  says 
that- 

"  Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion  or 
prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof."5 

By  this  clause,  Congress  is  forbidden  to  make  any  law 
looking  toward  any  establishment  of  a  national  religion,  or 
approving  or  disapproving  any  religion  already  established 
in  any  State  —  as  several  of  the  States  had  established  re- 
ligions when  this  amendment  was  adopted.  By  it  likewise 
Congress  is  forbidden  to  make  any  law  prohibiting  the  free 
exercise  of  religion  by  any  individual  in  all  the  land.  That 
is  to  say  that  Congress  is  forbidden  to  make  any  law  bear- 
ing in  any  way  whatever  on  the  subject  of  religion  ;  for  it 
is  impossible  to  make  a  law  on  the  subject  of  religion  with- 
out interfering  with  the  free  exercise  of  religion.  No  law 
can  ever  be  made  even  in  favor  of  any  religion  without 
prohibiting  the  free  exercise  of  that  religion.  No  man  can 
ever  sanction  legislation  in  favor  of  the  religion  in  which  he 
believes  without  robbing  himself  of  the  free  exercise  of  that 
religion.  Congress,  therefore,  is  absolutely  forbidden  ever 

4  Constitution,  Article  vi.  6Id.,  First  Amendment. 

51 


676  TEE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

to  make  any  law  on  the  subject  of   religion  in  any  way 
whatever. 

Consistently  with  all  this,  and  as  the  crown  of  all,  relig- 
ion is  not  in  any  sense  a  requisite  to  the  citizenship  of  the 
United  States,  for  again  the  supreme  law  declares  :  — 

"The  government  of  the  United  States  is  not  in  any  sense  founded 
on  the  Christian  religion."6 

Thus  logically  by  the  Declaration  and  explicitly  by  the 
Constitution,  the  government  of  the  United  States  is  com- 
pletely separated  from  religion.  And  such  is  the  second 
grand  idea  of  the  American  Revolution. 

And  it  is  also  the  scriptural  idea,  the  idea  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  of  God.  Let  this  be  demonstrated,  and  it  will  be 
proved  that  the  American  system  of  government  is  complete 
and  the  idea  perfect.  And  demonstrated  it  can  easily  be. 

To  the  definition  that  religion  is  the  recognition  of  God, 
as  an  object  of  worship,  love,  and  obedience,  the  scripture 
responds:  "It  is  written,  as  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,  every 
knee  shall  bow  to  me,  and  every  tongue  shall  confess  to 
God.  So  then  every  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of  himself 
to  God."  Eom.  xiv,  11,  12. 

And,  to  the  statement  that  religion  is  man's  personal  rela- 
tion of  faith  and  obedience  to  God,  the  scripture  responds : 
"Hast  thou  faith  ?  Have  it  to  thyself  before  God."  Rom. 
xiv,  22.  "For  we  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ  ;  that  every  one  may  receive  the  things  done 
in  his  body,  according  to  that  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be 
good  or  bad."  2  Cor.  v,  10. 

No  government  can  ever  account  to  God  for  any  individ- 
ual. No  man  nor  any  set  of  men  can  ever  have  faith  for 
another.  No  government  will  ever  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ  to  answer  even  for  itself  ;  much  less  for 
the  people  or  for  any  individual.  Therefore,  no  government 
can  ever  of  right  assume  any  responsibility  in  any  way  in 
any  matter  of  religion. 

""Treaty  with  Tripoli,"  Article  ii. 


GOVERNMENTAL  AUTHORITY  NOT  RELIGIOUS.     6T7 

As  to  religion  and  government,  Christ  commanded, 
"Render  to  Caesar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's,  and  to 
God  the  things  that  are  God's."  To  Caesar  —  to  govern- 
ment—  there  is  to  be  rendered  only  that  which  is  Caesar's  ; 
while  that  which  is  God's  is  to  be  rendered  to  God  alone. 
Men  are  not  to  render  to  Caesar  that  which  is  God's,  nor  are 
they  to  render  to  God  l>y  Caesar  that  which  is  God's.  That 
which  is  Caesar's  is  to  be  rendered  to  him  alone.  That  which 
is  God's  is  to  be  rendered  to  him  alone.  Now,  as  religion 
pertains  to  man's  relations  to  God,  it  is  to  be  rendered  to 
God  alone.  It  does  not  pertain  to  government  ;  it  never 
can  be  rendered  to  government.  Christ  has  forbidden  that 
it  should  be  so  rendered.  Therefore,  the  word  of  Jesus 
Christ  does  distinctly  and  decidedly  separate  religion  from 
earthly  government.  Nor  is  this  the  only  passage  of 
Scripture  on  this  subject.  It  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Book. 
In  the  former  part  of  this  chapter,  we  have  shown  by  the 
Scriptures  that  earthly  governments  —  the  powers  that  be  — 
are  ordained  of  God.  By  the  scriptures  cited,  we  have  seen 
that  the  power  of  Babylonia,  as  represented  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and  the  power  of  Media  and  Persia,  as  represented 
by  Darius  and  Cyrus,  was  distinctly  declared  to  be  ordained 
of  God.  Now  it  is  important  to  inquire,  Unto  what  was 
this  power  ordained?  Was  there  any  limit  set  to  it?  In 
short,  Was  this  power  which  was  ordained  of  God,  ordained 
to  be  exercised  in  things  pertaining  to  God,  that  is,  in 
matters  of  religion  ?  These  questions  are  clearly  answered 
in  the  Scriptures. 

In  the  third  chapter  of  Daniel  we  have  the  record  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  made  a  great  image  of  gold,  set  it  up  in 
the  plain  of  Dura,  and  gathered  together  the  princes,  the 
governors,  the  captains,  the  judges,  the  treasurers,  the  coun- 
selors, the  sheriffs,  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces,  to 
the  dedication  of  the  image  ;  and  they  stood  before  the 
image  that  had  been  set  up.  Then  a  herald  from  the  king 
cried  aloud  :  "To  you  it  is  commanded,  O  people,  nations, 
and  languages,  that  at  what  time  ye  hear  the  sound  of  the 


678  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

cornet,  flute, .  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  dulcimer,  and  all 
kinds  of  music,  ye  fall  down  and  worship  the  golden  image 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  hath  set  up  ;  and  whoso 
falleth  not  down  and  worshipeth  shall  the  same  hour  be  cast 
into  the  midst  of  a  burning  fiery  furnace." 

In  obedience  to  this  command,  all  the  people  bowed 
down  and  worshiped  before  the  image,  except  three  Jews, 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego.  This  disobedience 
was  reported  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  commanded  them  to  be 
brought  before  him,  when  he  asked  them  if  they  had  dis- 
obeyed his  order  intentionally.  He  himself  then  repeated 
his  command  to  them. 

These  men  knew  that  they  had  been  made  subject  to  the 
king  of  Babylon  by  the  Lord  himself.  It  had  not  only  been 
prophesied  by  Isaiah  (chap,  xxxix),  but  also  by  Jeremiah. 
At  the  final  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  Lord, 
through  Jeremiah,  told  the  people  to  submit  to  the  king  of 
Babylon,  arid  that  whosoever  would  do  it,  it  should  be  well 
with  them  ;  whosoever  would  not  do  it,  it  should  be  ill  with 
them.  Yet  these  men,  knowing  all  this,  made  answer  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  thus:  "O  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  are  not 
careful  to  answer  thee  in  this  matter.  If  it  be  so,  our  God 
whom  we  serve  is  able  to  deliver  us  from  the  burning  fiery 
furnace,  and  he  will  deliver  us  out  of  thy  hand,  O  king. 
But  if  not,  be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king,  that  we  will  not 
serve  thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which  thou 
hast  set  up." 

Then  the  three  men  were  cast  into  the  fiery  furnace, 
heated  seven  times  hotter  than  it  was  wont  to  be  heated ; 
but  suddenly  Nebuchadnezzar  rose  up  in  haste  and  astonish- 
ment, and  said  to  his  counselors,  "Did  we  not  cast  three 
men  l>ound  into  the  midst  of  the  fire  ? "  They  answered, 
"True,  O  king."  But  he  exclaimed,  "  Lo,  I  see  four  men 
loose,  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  they  have  no 
hurt  ;  and  the  form  of  the  fourth  is  like  the  Son  of  God." 
The  men  were  called  forth.  "Then  Nebuchadnezzar  spake 


DANIEL  AND    THE   GOVERNMENT.  679 

and  said,  Blessed  be  the  God  of  Shadracli,  JVIeshach,  and 
Abed-nego,  who  hath  sent  his  angel  and  delivered  his  serv- 
ants that  trusted  in  him,  and  have  changed  the  king's  word, 
and  yielded  their  bodies,  that  they  might  not  serve  nor 
worship  any  god,  except  their  own  God." 

Here  stand  the  following  facts  :  First,.  God  gave  power 
to  the  kingdom  of  Babylon  ;  second,  he  suffered  his  people 
to  be  subjected  as  captives  to  that  power ;  third,  by  a 
wonderful  miracle  he  defended  his  people  from  a  certain 
exercise  of  that  power.  Did  God  contradict  or  oppose 
himself? — Far  from  it.  What,  then,  do  these  facts  show?  — 
They  show  conclusively  that  this  was  an  undue  exercise 
of  the  power  which  God  had  given.  By  this  it  is  demon- 
strated that  the  power  of  the  kingdom  of  Babylon,  al- 
though ordained  of  God,  was  not  ordained  unto  any  such 
purpose  as  that  for  which  it  was  exercised  ;  that  though 
ordained  of  God,  it  was  not  ordained  to  be  exercised  in 
things  pertaining  to  God,  or  men's  rights  of  religion ; 
and  it  was  written  for  the  instruction  of  future  ages,  and 
for  our  admonition  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world  are 
come. 

Another  example :  Darius,  king  of  Media  and  Persia, 
made  Daniel  prime  minister  of  his  dominion.  But  a  num- 
ber of  the  presidents  and  princes,  envious  of  the  position 
given  to  Daniel,  attempted  to  undermine  and  displace  him. 
After  earnest  efforts  to  find  occasion  against  him  in  matters 
pertaining  to  the  kingdom,  they  were  forced  to  confess  that 
there  was  neither  error  nor  fault  anywhere  in  his  conduct. 
Then  said  these  men,  "We  shall  not  find  any 'occasion 
against  this  Daniel,  except  we  find  it  against  him  concern- 
ing the  law  of  his  God."  They  therefore  assembled  to- 
gether to  the  king,  and  told  him  that  all  the  presidents  of 
the  kingdom,  and  the  governors,  and  the  princes,  and  the 
captains,  had  consulted  together  to  establish  a  royal  statute, 
and  to  make  a  decree  that  whoever  should  ask  a  petition  of 
any  god  or  man,  except  the  king,  for  thirty  days,  should  be 


680  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC1. 

cast  into  the  den  of  lions.  Darius,  not  suspecting  their  ob- 
ject, signed  the  decree. 

Daniel  knew  that  the  decree  had  been  made,  and  signed 
by  the  king.  It  was  hardly  possible  for  him  not  to  know 
it,  being  prime  minister.  Yet  notwithstanding  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  affair,  he  went  into  his  chamber,  and  his 
windows  being-  open  toward  Jerusalem,  he  kneeled  upon 
his  knees  three  times  a  day,  and  prayed  and  gave  thanks 
before  God,  as  he  did  aforetime.  He  did  not  even  close 
the  windows.  He  simply  paid  no  attention  at  all  to  the 
decree  that  had  been  made,  although  it  forbade  his  do- 
ing as  he  did,  under  the  penalty  of  being  thrown  to  the 
lions. 

As  was  to  be  expected,  the  men  who  had  secured  the 
passage  of  the  decree,  "found"  him  praying  and  making 
supplications  before  his  God.  They  went  at  once  to  the 
king,  and  asked  him  if  he  had  not  signed  a  decree  that 
every  man  who  should  ask  a  petition  of  any  god  or  man 
within  thirty  days,  except  of  the  king,  should  be  cast  into 
the  den  of  lions.  The  king  replied  that  this  was  true,  and 
that,  according  to  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  it 
could  not  be  altered.  Then  they  told  him  that  Daniel  did 
not  regard  the  king,  nor  the  decree  that  he  had  signed,  but 
made  his  petition  three  times  a  day. 

The  king  realized  in  a  moment  that  he  had  been  entrapped  ; 
but  there  was  no  remedy.  Those  who  were  pushing  the 
matter,  held  before  him  the  law,  and  said,  "  Know,  O  king, 
that  the  law  of  the  JViedes  and  Persians  is,  That  no  decree 
or  statute  which  the  king  established!  may  be  changed." 
Nothing  could  be  done  ;  the  decree,  being  law,  must  be  en- 
forced. Daniel  was  cast  to  the  lions.  In  the  morning  the 
king  came  to  the  den  and  called  to  Daniel,  and  Daniel  re- 
plied, "  O  king,  live  forever  ;  my  God  hath  sent  his  angel, 
and  hath  shut  the  lion's  mouths,  that  they  have  not  hurt  me  ; 
forasmuch  as  before  him  innocency  was  found  in  mej  and 
also  before  thee,  O  king,  I  have  done  no  hurt." 


If  IS  INTENTIONALLY  SO.  681 

Thus  again  God  lias  shown  that  although  the  powers 
that  be  are  ordained  of  God,  they  are  not  ordained  to  act  in 
things  that  pertain  to  men's  relationship  to  God.  God  de- 
clares the  man  innocent,  who  disregards  or  violates  the  law 
that  interferes  with  man's  relationship  to  God,  or  that  pre- 
sumes to  dictate  in  matters  of  religion. 

These  cases  show  plainly  that,  according  to  the  mind  of 
God,  religion  and  earthly  government  are  to  be  entirely 
separated.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  is  in  harmony  with  the  will  of  God  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  Scriptures  of  truth,  upon  the  subject  of  relig- 
ion and  the  State. 

Yet,  for  reasons  which  will  appear  later,  there  is  now  an 
attempt  to  make  it  appear  that  this  was  the  result  of  forget- 
fulness,  if  not  rather  hostility  to  the  Christian  religion.  But 
nothing  could  be  farther  from  the  truth  than  both  of  these 
suggestions.  So  far  from  its  having  been  the  result  of  for- 
getfulness,  it  was  by  direct  design  :  and  so  far  frorfi  its  hav- 
ing resulted  from  hostility  to  Christianity,  it  was  out  of 
respect  for  it  and  for  the  rights  of  men  which  that  religion 
inculcates. 

It  is  impossible  for  it  to  have  been  in  any  way  a  matter 
of  forgetfulness,  because  the  Constitution  speaks  expressly 
upon  the  subject.  Yet,  though  the  Constitution  had  been 
wholly  silent  on  the  question,  the  fact  could  not  be  justly 
attributed  to  forgetfulness  or  carelessness  ;  because  the  work 
of  the  Convention  was  not  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution. 
After  the  Convention  had  finished  its  labors,  that  which  they 
had  done  was  submitted  for  approval  to  the  thirteen  States, 
every  one  of  which  was  most  vigilantly  wakeful  to  detect 
every  possible  defect  in  it ;  and  as  we  shall  presently  see, 
this  point  was  discussed  by  the  States  when  the  proposed 
Constitution  came  before  them  for  approval. 

And  that  the  Constitution  was  made  as  it  is,  in  this  mat- 
ter, entirely  out  of  respect  to  religion  and  to  Christianity  in 
particular,  is  susceptible  of  the  strongest  proof.  In  fact, 


682  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

Christian  churches  were  the  chief  factors  in  the  movement. 
We  have  already  shown  that  the  Constitution  is  the  comple- 
ment of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  ;  and  that  this 
phase  of  the  Constitution  is  but  the  logical  sequence  of 
the  Declaration.  Nor  is  this  all  ;  it  is  the  direct  fruit 
of  the  Declaration.  The  history  of  this  matter  is  worth 
reviving. 

June  12,  1776,  a  convention  of  the  Colonial  House  of 
Burgesses  of  Virginia,  adopted  a  Declaration  of  Rights,  com- 
posed of  sixteen  sections,  every  one  of  which,  in  substance, 
afterward  found  a  place  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
and  the  national  Constitution.  The  sixteenth  section  reads 
as  follows  :  - 

"  That  religion,  or  the  duty  which  we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the 
manner  of  discharging  it,  can  be  directed  only  by  reason  and  conviction, 
not  by  force  or  violence,  and  therefore  all  men  are  equally  entitled  to 
the  free  exercise  of  religion,  according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience  ; 
and  that  it  is  the  mutual  duty  of  all  to  practice  Christian  forbearance, 
love,  and  charity  toward  each  other."7 

This  was  followed,  July  4.  by  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, written  by  Thomas  Jefferson  of  Virginia.  The 
Declaration  of  Independence  had  no  sooner  been  published 
abroad,  than  the  Presbytery  of  Hanover  in  Virginia,  at  its 
very  first  meeting,  openly  took  its  stand  in  the  recognition 
of  the  new  and  independent  nation,  and  addressed  to  the 
Virginia  House  of  Assembly  the  following  memorial  :  — 

"To  the  Honorable,  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  :  The  memo- 
rial of  the  Presbytery  of  Hanover  humbly  represents  :  That  your  memo- 
rialists are  governed  by  the  same  sentiments  which  have  inspired  the 
United  States  of  America,  and  are  determined  that  nothing  in  our  power 
and  influence  shall  be  wanting  to  give  success  to  their  common  cause. 
We  would  also  represent  that  dissenters  from  the  Church  of  England  in 
this  countiy  have  ever  been  desirous  to  conduct  themselves  as  peaceable 
members  of  the  civil  government,  for  which  reason  they  have  hitherto  sub- 
mitted to  various  ecclesiastic  burdens  and  restrictions  that  are  inconsis- 
tent with  equal  liberty.  But  now  when  the  many  and  grievous  oppressions 
7 "  Charters  and  Constitutions,"  Virginia. 


THE  PRESBYTERY  OF  IIANOVER.  Q83 

of  our  mother  country  have  laid  this  continent  under  the  necessity  of 
casting  off  the  yoke  of  tyranny,  and  of  forming  independent  govern- 
ments upon  equitable  and  liberal  foundations,  we  flatter  ourselves  that  we 
thall  be  freed  from  all  the  incumbrauces  which  a  spirit  of  domination, 
prejudice,  or  bigotry  has  interwoven  with  most  other  political  systems. 
This  we  are  the  more  strongly  encouraged  to  expect  by  the  Declaration  of 
Rights,  so  universally  applauded  for  that  dignity,  firmness,  and  precision 
with  which  it  delineates  and  asserts  the  privileges  of  society,  and  the 
prerogatives  of  human  nature  ;  and  which  we  embrace  as  the  Magna 
Charta  of  our  commonwealth,  that  can  never  be  violated  without  en- 
dangering the  grand  superstructure  it  was  designed  to  sustain.  Therefore, 
we  rely  upon  this  Declaration,  as  well  as  the  justice  of  our  honorable  legis- 
lature, to  secure  us  the  free  exercise  of  religion  according  to  the  dictates 
of  our  own  consciences  :  and  we  should  fall  short  in  our  duty  to  our- 
selves, and  the  many  and  numerous  congregations  under  our  care,  were 
we,  upon  this  occasion,  to  neglect  laying  before  you  a  statement  of  the 
religious  grievances  under  which  we  have  hitherto  labored,  that  they 
may  no  longer  be  continued  in  our  present  form  of  government. 

"It  is  well  known  that  in  the  frontier  counties,  which  are  justly 
supposed  to  contain  a  fifth  part  of  the  inhabitants  of  Virginia,  the  dis- 
senters have  borne  the  heavy  burdens  of  purchasing  glebes,  building 
churches,  and  supporting  the  established  clergy,  where  there  are  very 
few  Episcopalians,  either  to  assist  in  bearing  the  expense,  or  to  reap  the 
advantage  ;  and  that  throughout  other  parts  of  the  country  there  are 
also  many  thousands  of  zealous  friends  and  defenders  of  our  State,  who, 
besides  the  invidious  and  disadvantageous  restrictions  to  which  they 
have  been  subjected,  annually  pay  large  taxes  to  support  an  establish- 
ment from  which  their  consciences  and  principles  oblige  them  to  dis- 
sent ;  all  which  are  confessedly  so  many  violations  of  their  natural 
rights,  and,  in  their  consequences,  a  restraint  upon  freedom  of  inquiry 
and  private  judgment. 

"  In  this  enlightened  age,  and  in  a  land  where  all  of  every  denomi- 
nation are  united  in  the  most  strenuous  efforts  to  be  free,  we  hope  and 
expect  that  our  representatives  will  cheerfully  concur  in  removing  every 
species  of  religious  as  well  as  civil  bondage.  Certain  it  is,  that  every 
argument  for  civil  liberty  gains  additional  strength  when  applied  to  lib- 
erty in  the  concerns  of  religion  ;  and  there  is  no  argument  in  favor  of 
establishing  the  Christian  religion  but  may  be  pleaded,  with  equal  pro- 
priety, for  establishing  the  tenets  of  Mohammed  by  those  who  believe 
the  Alcoran  ;  or,  if  this  be  not  true,  it  is  at  least  impossible  for  the  magis- 
trate to  adjudge  the  right  of  preference  among  the  various  sects  that 
profess  the  Christian  faith,  without  erecting  a  claim  to  infallibility, 
which  would  lead  us  back  to  the  Church  of  Rome. 


684  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

"We  beg  leave  farther  to  represent,  that  religious  establishments 
are  highly  injurious  to  the  temporal  interests  of  any  community.  With- 
out insisting  upon  the  ambition  and  the  arbitrary  practices  of  those  who 
are  favored  by  government,  or  the  intriguing,  seditious  spirit  which  is 
commonly  excited  by  this,  as  well  as  by  every  other  kind  of  oppression, 
such  establishments  greatly  retard  population,  and,  consequently,  the 
progress  of  arts,  sciences,  and  manufactures.  Witness  the  rapid  growth 
and  improvement  of  the  Northern  provinces  compared  with  this.  No 
one  can  deny  that  the  more  early  settlements  and  the  many  superior  ad- 
vantages of  our  country,  would  have  invited  multitudes  of  artificers,  me- 
chanics, and  other  ^useful  members  of  society,  to  fix  their  habitation 
among  us,  who  have  either  remained  in  their  place  of  nativity,  or  pre- 
ferred worse  civil  governments,  and  a  more  barren  soil,  where  they  might 
enjoy  the  rights  of  conscience  more  fully  than  they  had  a  prospect  of  do- 
ing in  this  ;  from  which  we  infer  that  Virginia  might  have  now  been 
the  capital  of  America,  and  a  match  for  the  British  arms,  without  de- 
pending on  others  for  the  necessaries  of  war,  had  it  not  been  prevented 
by  her  religious  establishment. 

"  Neither  can  it  be  made  to  appear  that  the  gospel  needs  any  such 
civil  aid.  We  rather  conceive  that,  when  our  blessed  Saviour  declares 
his  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,  he  renounces  all  dependence  upon 
State  power  ;  and  as  his  weapons  are  spiritual,  and  were  only  designed  to 
have  influence  on  the  judgment  and  heart  of  men,  we  are  persuaded  that 
if  mankind  were  left  in  quiet  possession  of  their  inalienable  religious 
privileges,  Christianity,  as  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  would  continue 
to  prevail  and  flourish  in  the  greatest  purity  by  its  own  native  excellence, 
and  under  the  all-disposing  providence  of  God. 

"We  would  also  humbly  represent,  that  the  only  proper  objects  of 
civil  government  are  the  happiness  and  protection  of  men  in  the  present 
state  of  existence,  the  security  of  the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  the 
citizens,  and  to  restrain  the  vicious  and  encourage  the  virtuous  by 
wholesome  laws,  equally  extending  to  every  individual  ;  but  that  the 
duty  which  we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the  manner  of  discharging  it, 
can  only  be  directed  by  reason  and  conviction,  and  is  nowhere  cogniz- 
able but  at  the  tribunal  of  the  universal  Judge. 

"Therefore  we  ask  no  ecclesiastical  establishments  for  ourselves; 
neither  can  we  approve  of  them  when  granted  to  others.  This,  indeed, 
would  be  giving  exclusive  or  separate  emoluments  or  privileges  to  one 
set  of  men,  without  any  special  public  services,  to  the  common  reproach 
and  injury  of  every  other  denomination.  And  for  the  reason  recited, 
we  are  induced  earnestly  to  entreat  that  all  laws  now  in  force  in  this 
commonwealth,  which  countenance  religious  domination,  may  be 
speedily  repealed  ;  that  all  of  every  religious  sect  may  be  protected  in 


THEIR  SECOND  MEMORIAL.  685 

the  full  exercise  of  their  several  modes  of  worship  ;  exempted  from  all 
taxes  for  the  support  of  any  church  whatsoever,  farther  than  what  may 
be  agreeable  to  their  own  private  choice  or  voluntary  obligation.  This 
being  done,  all  partial  and  invidious  distinction  will  be  abolished,  to  the 
great  honor  and  interest  of  the  State,  and  every  one  be  left  to  stand  or 
fall  according  to  his  merit,  which  can  never  be  the  case  so  long  as  any 
one  denomination  is  established  in  preference  to  the  others. 

"That  the  great  Sovereign  of  the  universe  may  inspire  you  with 
unanimity,  wisdom,  and  resolution,  and  bring  you  to  a  just  determina- 
tion on  all  the  important  concerns  before  you,  is  the  fervent  prayer  of 
your  memorialists."8 

The  Presbytery  of  Hanover  was  immediately  joined  in 
the  good  work  by  the  Baptists  and  the  Quakers,  who  sent 
up  petitions  to  the  same  purpose.  The  Episcopalian  was 
the  established  church  of  Virginia,  and  had  been  ever  since 
the  planting  of  the  colony.  The  Episcopalians  and  the 
Methodists  sent  up  counter-memorials,  pleading  for  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  system  of  established  religion.  Two  mem- 
bers of  the  assembly,  Messrs.  Pendleton  and  Nicolas,  cham- 
pioned the  establishment,  and  Jefferson,  as  ever,  espoused 
the  cause  of  liberty  and  right.  After  nearly  two  months  of 
what  Jefferson  pronounced  the  severest  contest  in  which  he 
was  ever  engaged,  the  cause  of  freedom  prevailed,  and 
December  6,  1776,  the  Assembly  passed  a  law  repealing  all 
the  colonial  laws  and  penalties  prejudicial  to  dissenters, 
releasing  them  from  any  further  compulsory  contributions 
to  the  Episcopal  Church,  and  discontinuing  the  State  sup- 
port of  the  Episcopal  clergy  after  January  1,  1777. 

A  motion  was  then  made  to  levy  a  general  tax  for  the 
support  of  all  denominations,  but  it  was  postponed  till  a 
future  Assembly.  To  the  next  Assembly  petitions  were 
sent  strongly  pleading  for  the  general  assessment.  But  the 
Presbytery  of  Hanover,  still  strongly  supported  by  the  Bap- 
tists and  the  Quakers,  was  again  on  hand  with  a  memorial, 
in  which  it  referred  to  the  points  previously  presented,  and 
then  proceeded  as  follows  :  — 

8Balrd's  "Religion  in  America,"  book  iii,  chap,  iii,  par.  9-16. 


686  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

"  We  would  also  humbly  represent,  that  the  only  proper  objects  of 
civil  government  are  the  happiness  and  protection  of  men  in  the  present 
state  of  existence,  the  security  of  the  life,  liberty,  and  property  of  the 
citizens,  and  to  restrain  the  vicious  and  to  encourage  the  virtuous  by 
wholesome  laws,  equally  extending  to  every  individual ;  but  that  the 
duty  which  we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the  manner  of  discharging  it, 
can  only  be  directed  by  reason  and  conviction,  and  is  nowhere  cogniz- 
able but  at  the  tribunal  of  the  universal  Judge. 

"To  illustrate  and  confirm  these  assertions,  we  beg  leave  to  observe, 
that  to  judge  for  ourselves,  and  to  engage  in  the  exercise  of  religion 
agreeably  to  the  dictates  of  our  own  consciences,  is  an  inalienable  right, 
which,  upon  the  principles  on  which  the  gospel  was  first  propagated, 
and  the  Reformation  from  popery  carried  on,  can  never  be  transferred 
to  another.  Neither  does  the  church  of  Christ  stand  in  need  of  a  gen- 
eral assessment  for.  its  support ;  and  most  certain  we  are  that  it  would 
be  of  no  advantage,  but  an  injury  to  the  society  to  which  we  belong  ;  and 
as  every  good  Christian  believes  that  Christ  has  ordained  a  complete 
system  of  laws  for  the  government  of  his  kingdom,  so  we  are  persuaded 
that  by  his  providence  he  will  support  it  to  its  final  consummation.  In 
the  fixed  belief  of  this  principle,  that  the  kingdom  of  Christ  and  the 
concerns  of  religion  are  beyond  the  limits  of  civil  control,  we  should  act 
a  dishonest,  inconsistent  part,  were  we  to  receive  any  emoluments  from 
human  establishments  for  the  support  of  the  gospel. 

"These  things  being  considered,  we  hope  that  we  shall  be  excused 
for  remonstrating  against  a  general  assessment  for  any  religious  purpose. 
As  the  maxims  have  long  been  approved,  that  every  servant  is  to  obey 
his  master,  and  that  the  hireling  is  accountable  for  his  conduct  to  him 
from  whom  he  receives  his  wages  ;  in  like  manner,  if  the  legislature  has 
any  rightful  authority  over  the  ministers  of  the  gospel  in  the  exercise  of 
their  sacred  ofiice,  and  if  it  is  their  duty  to  levy  a  maintenance  for  them 
as  such,  then  it  will  follow  that  they  may  revive  the  old  establishment 
in  its  former  extent,  or  ordain  a  new  one  for  any  sect  they  may  think 
proper ;  they  are  invested  with  a  power  not  only  to  determine,  but  it  is 
incumbent  on  them  to  declare  who  shall  preach,  what  they  shall  preach, 
to  whom,  when,  and  in  what  places  they  shall  preach  ;  or  to  impose  any 
regulations  and  restrictions  upon  religious  societies  that  they  may  judge 
expedient.  These  consequences  are  so  plain  as  not  to  be  denied,  and 
they  are  so  entirely  subversive  of  religious  liberty,  that  if  they  should 
take  place  in  Virginia,  we  should  be  reduced  to  the  melancholy  neces- 
sity of  saying  with  the  apostles  in  like  cases,  '  Judge  ye  whether  it  is  best 
to  obey  God  or  men,'  and  also  of  acting  as  they  acted. 

"  Therefore,  as  it  is  contrary  to  our  principles  and  interest,  and,  as 
we  think,  subversive  of  religious  liberty,  we  do  again  most  earnestly 


MADISON'S  MEMORIAL  AND  REMONSTRANCE.         687 

entreat  that   our  legislature  would   never   extend  any   assessment   for 
religious  purposes  to  us  or  to  the  congregations  under  our  care."9 

In  1779  they  defeated  the  bill,  which  had  been  ordered 
to  a  third  reading.  But  in  the  first  Assembly  after  the  war 
was  over,  in  1784,  it  was  brought  up  again,  this  time  with 
Patrick  Henry  as  its  leading  advocate.  It  was  entitled  ' '  A 
Bill  Establishing  a  Provision  for  Teachers  of  the  Christian 
Religion."  James  Madison  stood  with  Jefferson.  As  the 
bill  was  about  to  pass,  they  succeeded  in  carrying  a  motion 
to  postpone  it  till  the  next  session,  but  in  the  meantime,  to 
have  it  printed  and  generally  circulated.  As  soon  as  this 
had  been  accomplished,  Madison  wrote,  also  for  general  cir- 
culation and  signature,  a  Memorial  and  Remonstrance,  to  be 
presented  to  the  next  Assembly,  in  opposition  to  the  bill. 
This  document  reads  as  follows  :  — 

"We,  the  subscribers,  citizens  of  the  said  commonwealth,  having 
taken  into  serious  consideration  a  bill  printed  by  order  of  the  last  session 
of  General  Assembly,  entitled,  'A  Bill  Establishing  a  Provision  for 
Teachers  of  the  Christian  Eeligion,'  and  conceiving  that  the  same,  if 
finally  armed  with  the  sanctions  of  a  law,  will  be  a  dangerous  abuse  of 
power,  are  bound  as  faithful  members  of  a  free  State  to  remonstrate 
against  it,  and  to  declare  the  reasons  by  which  we  are  determined.  We 
remonstrate  against  the  said  bill  — 

"1.  Because  we  hold  it  for  a  fundamental  and  undeniable  truth 
'  that  religion,  or  the  duty  which  we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the  manner 
of  discharging  it,  can  be  directed  only  by  reason  and  conviction,  not  by 
force  or  violence.'  The  religion,  then,  of  every  man  must  be  left  to  the 
conviction  and  conscience  of  every  man  ;  and  it  is  the  right  of  every 
man  to  exercise  it  as  these  may  dictate.  This  right  is  in  its  nature  an 
unalienable  right.  It  is  unalienable,  because  the  opinions  of  men,  depend- 
ing only  on  the  evidence  contemplated  in  their  own  minds,  cannot  fol- 
low the  dictates  of  other  men.  It  is  unalienable,  also,  because  what  is 
here  a  right  towards  men  is  a  duty  towards  the  Creator.  It  is  the  duty 
of  every  man  to  render  to  the  Creator  such  hpmage,  and  such  only,  as  he 
believes  to  be  acceptable  to  him.  This  duty  is  precedent,  both  in  order 
of  time  and  in  degree  of  obligation,  to  the  claims  of  civil  society.  Be- 
fore any  man  can  be  considered  as  a  member  of  civil  society,  he  must  be 
considered  as  a  subject  of  the  Governor  of  the  universe  :  and  if  a  mem- 
ber of  civil  society  who  enters  into  any  subordinate  association  must 

9  Id.,  par.  21-23, 


688  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

always  do  it  with  a  reservation  of  his  duty  to  the  general  authority,  much 
more  must  every  man  who  becomes  a  member  of  any  particular  civil  so- 
ciety do  it  with  a  saving  of  his  allegiance  to  the  universal  Sovereign. 
We  maintain,  therefore,  that  in  matters  of  religion  no  man's  right  is 
abridged  by  the  institution  of  civil  society,  and  that  religion  is  wholly 
exempt  from  its  cognizance.  True  it  is,  that  no  other  rule  exists  by  which 
any  question  which  may  divide  a  society  can  be  ultimately  determined 
than  the  will  of  the  majority;  but  it  is  also  true  that  the  majority  may 
trespass  upon  the  rights  of  the  minority. 

"  2.  Because,  if  religion  be  exempt  from  the  authority  of  the  society 
at  large,  still  less  can  it  be  subject  to  that  of  the  legislative  body.  The 
latter  are  but  the  creatures  and  vicegerents  of  the  former.  Their  juris- 
diction is  both  derivative  and  limited.  It  is  limited  with  regard  to  the 
co-ordinate  departments  :  more  necessarily  is  it  limited  with  regard  to 
the  constituents  The  preservation  of  a  free  government  requires  not 
merely  that  the  metes  and  bounds  which  separate  each  department  of 
power  be  invariably  maintained,  but  more  especially  that  neither  of  them 
be  suffered  to  overleap  the  great  barrier  which  defends  the  rights  of  the 
people.  The  rulers  who  are  guilty  of  such  an  encroachment  exceed  the 
commission  from  which  they  derive  their  authority,  and  are  tyrants. 
The  people  who  submit  to  it  are  governed  by  laws  made  neither  by 
themselves  nor  by  any  authority  derived  from  them,  and  are  slaves. 

"  3.  Because  it  is  proper  to  take  alarm  at  the  first  experiment  upon 
our  liberties.  We  hold  this  prudent  jealousy  to  be  the  first  duty  of 
citizens,  and  one  of  the  noblest  characteristics  of  the  late  Revolution. 
The  freemen  of  America  did  not  wait  till  usurped  power  had  strength- 
ened itself  by  exercise,  and  entangled  the  question  in  precedents.  They 
saw  all  the  consequences  in  the  principle,  and  they  avoided  the  con- 
sequences by  denying  the  principle.  We  revere  this  lesson  too  much, 
soon  to  forget  it.  Who  does  not  see  that  the  same  authority  which  can 
establish  Christianity,  in  exclusion  of  all  other  religions,  may  establish, 
with  the  same  ease,  any  particular  sect  of  Christians,  in  exclusion  of  all 
other  sects  ?  that  the  same  authority  which  can  force  a  citizen  to  con- 
tribute three  pence  only,  of  his  property,  for  the  support  of  any  one  estab- 
lishment, may  force  him  to  conform  to  any  other  establishment  in  all 
cases  whatsoever  ? 

"  4.  Because  the  bill  violates  that  equality  which  ought  to  be  the 
basis  of  every  law,  and  which  is  more  indispensable  in  proportion  as  the 
validity  or  expediency  of  any  law  is  more  liable  to  be  impeached.  '  If 
all  men  are  by  nature  equally  free  and  independent,'  all  men  are  to  be 
considered  as  entering  into  society  on  equal  conditions :  as  relinquishing 
no  more,  and  therefore,  retaining  no  less,  one  than  another,  of  their 
natural  rights.  Above  all,  are  they  to  be  considered  as  retaining  an 
'equal  title  to  the  free  exercise  of  religion  according  to  the  dictates  of 


CHRISTIANITY  DOES  NOT  NEED  IT.  689 

conscience.'  Whilst  we  assert  for  ourselves  a  freedom  to  embrace,  to 
profess,  and  to  observe,  the  religion  which  we  believe  to  be  of  divine 
origin,  we  cannot  deny  an  equal  freedom  to  them  whose  minds  have  not 
yet  yielded  to  the  evidence  which  has  convinced  us.  If  this  freedom  be 
abused,  it  is  an  offense  against  God,  not  against  man.  To  God,  there- 
fore, not  to  man,  must  an  account  of  it  be  rendered.  As  the  bill  vio- 
lates equality  by  subjecting  some  to  peculiar  burdens,  so  it  violates  the 
same  principle  by  granting  to  others  peculiar  exemptions.  Are  the 
Quakers  and  Menonists  the  only  sects  who  think  a  compulsive  support 
of  their  religions  unnecessary  and  unwarrantable  ?  Can  their  piety 
alone  be  intrusted  with  the  care  of  public  worship  ?  Ought  their  relig- 
ions to  be  endowed  above  all  others  with  extraordinary  privileges  by 
which  proselytes  may  be  enticed  from  all  others  ?  We  think  too  favor- 
ably of  the  justice  and  good  sense  of  these  denominations  to  believe  that 
they  either  covet  pre-eminences  over  their  fellow-citizens,  or  that  they 
will  be  seduced  by  them  from  the  common  opposition  to  the  measure. 

"5.  Because  the  bill  implies  either  that  the  civil  magistrate  is  a 
competent  judge  of  religious  truths,  or  that  he  may  employ  religion 
as  an  engine  of  civil  policy.  The  first  is  an  arrogant  pretension,  fal- 
sified by  the  contradictory  opinions  of  rulers  in  all  ages  and  through- 
out the  world  ;  the  second,  an  unhallowed  perversion  of  the  means  of 
salvation. 

"6.  Because  the  establishment  proposed  by  the  bill  is  not  requisite 
for  the  support  of  the  Christian  religion.  To  say  that  it  is,  is  a  contra- 
diction to  the  Christian,  religion  itself,  for  every  page  of  it  disavows  a 
dependence  on  the  powers  of  this  world.  It  is  a  contradiction  to 
fact ;  for  it  is  known  that  this  religion  both  existed  and  flourished,  not 
only  without  the  support  of  human  laws,  but  in  spite  of  every  opposi- 
tion from  them  ;  and  not  only  during  the  period  of  miraculous  aid,  but 
long  after  it  had  been  left  to  its  own  evidence  and  the  ordinary  care  of 
providence.  Nay,  it  is  a  contradiction  in  terms  ;  for  a  religion  not  in- 
vented by  human  policy  must  have  pre-existed  and  been  supported 
before  it  was  established  by  human  policy.  It  is,  moreover,  to  weaken 
in  those  who  profess  this  religion  a  pious  confidence  in  its  innate 
excellence  and  the  patronage  of  its  Author  ;  and  to  foster  in  those  who 
still  reject  it  a  suspicion  that  its  friends  are  too  conscious  of  its  fallacies 
to  trust  it  to  its  own  merits. 

"7.  Because  experience  witnesseth  that  ecclesiastical  establishments, 
instead  of  maintaining  the  purity  and  efficacy  of  religion,  have  had  a 
contrary  operation.  During  almost  fifteen  centuries  has  the  legal  estab- 
lishment of  Christianity  been  on  trial.  What  have  been  its  fruits  ? 
More  or  less,  in  all  places,  pride  and  indolence  in  the  clergy  ;  ignorance 
and  servility  in  the  laity  ;  in  both  superstition,  bigotry,  and  persecution. 
Inquire  of  the  teachers  of  Christianity  for  the  ages  in  which  it  appeared 


690  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

in  its  greatest  luster  ;  those  of  every  sect  point  to  the  ages  prior  to  its 
incorporation  with  civil  policy.  Propose  a  restoration  of  this  primitive 
state,  in  which  its  teachers  depended  on  the  voluntary  rewards  of  their 
flocks;  —  many  of  them  predict  its  downfall.  On  which  side  ought 
their  testimony  to  have  greatest  weight ;  —  when  for,  or  when  against, 
their  interest  ? 

"8.  Because  the  establishment  in  question  is  not  necessary  for  the 
support  of  civil  government.  If  it  be  urged  as  necessary  for  the  sup- 
port of  civil  government  only  as  it  is  a  means  of  supporting  religion, 
and  it  be  not  necessary  for  the  latter  purpose,  it  cannot  be  necessary  for 
the  former.  If  religion  be  not  within  the  cognizance  of  civil  govern- 
ment, how  can  its  legal  establishment  be  necessary  to  civil  government  ? 
What  influence,  in  fact,  have  ecclesiastical  establishments  had  on  civil 
society  ?  In  some  instances  they  have  been  seen  to  erect  a  spiritual 
tyranny  on  the  ruins  of  civil  authority  ;  in  many  instances  they  have 
been  seen  upholding  the  thrones  of  political  tyranny  ;  in  no  instance  have 
they  been  seen  the  guardians  of  the  liberties  of  the  people.  Rulers  who 
wished  to  subvert  the  public  liberty  may  have  found  in  established  clergy 
convenient  auxiliaries.  A  just  government,  instituted  to  secure  and  per- 
petuate it,  needs  them  not.  Such  a  government  will  be  best  supported 
by  protecting  every  citizen  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  religion  with  the 
same  equal  hand  which  protects  his  person  and  his  property  ;  by  neither 
invading  the  equal  right  of  any  sect,  nor  suffering  any  sect  to  invade 
those  of  another. 

"Because  the  proposed  establishment  is  a  departure  from  that  generous 
policy  which,  offering  an  asylum  to  the  persecuted  and  oppressed  of 
every  nation  and  religion,  promised  a  luster  to  our  country,  and  an  acces- 
sion to  the  number  of  its  citizens.  What  a  melancholy  mark  is  the  bill, 
of  sudden  degeneracy  !  Instead  of  holding  forth  an  asylum  to  the  perse- 
cuted, it  is  itself  a  signal  of  persecution.  It  degrades  from  the  equal 
rank  of  citizens  all  those  whose  opinions  in  religion  do  not  bend  to  those 
of  the  legislative  authority.  Distant  as  it  may  be  in  its  present  form  from 
the  Inquisition,  it  differs  from  it  only  in  degree.  The  one  is  the  first  step, 
the  other  is  the  last,  in  the  career  of  intolerance.  The  magnanimous 
sufferer  of  this  cruel  scourge  in  foreign  regions  must  view  the  bill  as  a 
beacon  on  our  coast  warning  him  to  seek  some  other  haven,  where  liberty 
and  philanthropy,  in  their  due  extent,  may  offer  a  more  certain  repose 
from  his  troubles. 

"  Because  it  will  have  a  like  tendency  to  banish  our  citizens.  The  al- 
lurements presented  by  other  situations  are  every  day  thinning  their 
number.  To  superadd  a  fresh  motive  to  emigration  by  revoking  the 
liberty  which  they  now  enjoy,  would  be  the  same  species  of  folly  which 
has  dishonored  and  depopulated  flourishing  kingdoms. 


IT   UNDERMINES  PUBLIC  AUTHORITY.  691 

"Because  it  will  destroy  that  moderation  and  harmony  which  the 
forbearance  of  our  laws  to  intermeddle  with  religion  has  produced  among 
its  several  sects.  Torrents  of  blood  have  been  spilt  in  the  Old  World  in 
consequence  of  vain  attempts  of  the  secular  arm  to  extinguish  religious 
discord  by  proscribing  all  differences  in  religious  opinion.  Time  has  at 
length  revealed  the  true  remedy.  Every  relaxation  of  narrow  and 
rigorous  policy,  wherever  it  has  been  tried,  has  been  found  to  assuage 
the  disease.  The  American  theater  has  exhibited  proofs  that  equal  and 
complete  liberty,  if  it  does  not  wholly  eradicate  it,  sufficiently  destroys 
its  malignant  influence  on  the  health  and  prosperity  of  the  State.  If 
with  the  salutary  effects  of  this  system  under  our  own  eyes,  we  begin  to 
contract  the  bounds  of  religious  freedom,  we  know  no  name  which  will 
too  severely  reproach  our  folly.  At  least  let  warning  be  taken  at  the 
first-fruits  of  the  threatened  innovation.  The  very  appearance  of  the 
bill  has  transformed  '  that  Christian  forbearance,  love,  and  charity,' 
which  of  late  mutually  prevailed,  into  animosities  and  jealousies,  which 
may  not  be  appeased.  What  mischiefs  may  not  be  dreaded,  should  this 
enemy  to  the  public  quiet  be  armed  with  the  force  of  law  ? 

"  Because  the  policy  of  the  bill  is  adverse  to  the  diffusion  of  the 
light  of  Christianity.  The  first  wish  of  those  who  enjoy  this  precious  gift 
ought  to  be  that  it  may  be  imparted  to  the  whole  race  of  mankind.  Com- 
pare the  number  of  those  who  have  as  yet  received  it  with  the  number  still 
remaining  under  the  dominion  of  false  religions,  and  how  small  is  the 
former  ?  Does  the  policy  of  the  bill  tend  to  lessen  the  disproportion  ? 
No  ;  it  at  once  discourages  those  who  are  strangers  to  the  light  of 
revelation  from  coming  into  the  region  of  it,  and  countenances  by 
example  tbe  nations  who  continue  in  darkness  in  shutting  out  those 
who  might  convey  it  to  them.  Instead  of  leveling,  as  far  as  possible, 
every  obstacle  to  the  victorious  progress  of  truth,  the  bill,  with  an 
ignoble  and  unchristian  timidity,  would  circumscribe  it  with  a  wall  of 
defense  against  the  encroachments  of  error. 

"Because  attempts  to  enforce,  by  legal  sanctions,  acts  obnoxious  to  so 
great  a  proportion  of  citizens,  tend  to  enervate  the  laws  in  general,  and 
to  slacken  the  bands  of  society.  If  it  be  difficult  to  execute  any  law 
which  is  not  generally  deemed  necessary  or  salutary,  what  must  be  the 
case  where  it  is  deemed  invalid  and  dangerous  ?  And  what  may  be  the 
effect  of  so  striking  an  example  of  impotency  in  the  government  on  its 
general  authority  ? 

"  Because  a  measure  of  such  singular  magnitude  and  delicacy  ought 
not  to  be  imposed  without  the  clearest  evidence  that  it  is  called  for  by  a 
majority  of  citizens  ;  and  no  satisfactory  method  is  yet  proposed  by  which 
the  voice  of  the  majority  in  this  case  may  be  determined,  or  its  influence 
secured.  'The  people  of  the  respective  counties  are,  indeed,  requested 
52 


C92  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

to  signify  their  opinion  respecting  the  adoption  of  the  bill,  to  the  next 
session  of  the  Assembly.'  But  the  representation  must  be  made  equal 
before  the  voice  either  of  the  representatives  or  of  the  counties  will  be 
that  of  the  people.  Our  hope  is,  that  neither  of  the  former  will, 
after  due  consideration,  espouse  the  dangerous  principle  of  the  bill. 
Should  the  event  disappoint  us,  it  will  still  leave  us  in  full  confidence 
that  a  fair  appeal  to  the  latter  will  reverse  the  sentence  against  our 
liberties. 

"Because,  finally,  'The  equal  right  of  every  citizen  to  the  free  exer- 
cise of  his  religion,  according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience,'  is  held  by  the 
same  tenure  with  all  our  other  rights.  If  we  recur  to  its  origin,  it  is 
equally  the  gift  of  nature  ;  if  we  weigh  its  importance,  it  cannot  be  less 
dear  to  us  ;  if  we  consult  the  declaration  of  those  rights  'which  pertain 
to  the  good  people  of  Virginia  as  the  basis  and  foundation  of  govern- 
ment/ it  is  enumerated  with  equal  solemnity,  or  rather  with  studied  em- 
phasis. Either,  then,  we  must  say  that  the  will  of  the  legislature  is  the 
only  measure  of  their  authority,  and  that  in  the  plenitude  of  that  authority 
they  may  sweep  away  all  our  fundamental  rights,  or  that  they  are  bound 
to  leave  this  particular  right  untouched  and  sacred.  Either  we  must  say 
that  they  may  control  the  freedom  of  the  press,  may  abolish  the  trial  by 
jury,  may  swallow  up  the  executive  and  judiciary  powers  of  the  State  ; 
nay,  that  they  may  despoil  us  of  our  very  right  of  suffrage,  and  erect 
themselves  into  an  independent  and  hereditary  assembly,  or  we  must  say 
that  they  have  no  authority  to  enact  into  a  law  the  bill  under  consid- 
eration. 

"We,  the  subscribers,  say  that  the  General  Assembly  of  this  com- 
monwealth have  no  such  authority.  And  in  order  that  no  effort  may  be 
omitted  on  our  part  against  so  dangerous  an  usurpation,  we  oppose  to  it 
this  remonstrance  ;  earnestly  praying,  as  we  are  in  duty  bound,  that  the 
Supreme  Lawgiver  of  the  universe,  by  illuminating  those  to  whom  it  is 
addressed,  may,  on  the  one  hand,  turn  their  councils  from  every  act  which 
would  affront  his  holy  prerogative,  or  violate  the  trust  committed  to 
them  ;  and,  on  the  other,  guide  them  into  every  measure  which  may  be 
worthy  of  his  blessing,  redound  to  their  own  praise,  and  establish  more 
firmly  the  liberties,  the  prosperity,  and  the  happiness  of  the  common- 
wealth." 10 

This  incomparable  remonstrance  was  so  generally  signed 
that  the  bill  for  a  general  assessment  was  not  only  defeated, 
but  in  its  place  there  was  passed,  December  26,  1785,  "An 
Act  for  Establishing  Keligions  Freedom,"  written  by  Thomas 
Jefferson,  and  reading  as  follows  :  — 

10  Blakely's  "  American  State  Papers,"  pp.  27-38. 


VIRGINIA   DELIVERED.  f,93 

"  Well  aware  that  Almighty  God  hath  created  the  mind  free  ;  that 
all  attempts  to  influence  it  by  temporal  punishments  or  burdens,  or  by 
civil  incapacitations,  tend  only  to  beget  habits  of  hypocrisy  and  mean- 
ness, and  are  a  departure  from  the  plan  of  the  holy  Author  of  our  relig- 
ion, who  being  Lord  both  of  body  and  mind,  yet  chose  not  to  propagate 
it  by  coercions  on  either,  as  was  in  his  almighty  power  to  do  ;  that  the 
impious  presumption  of  legislators  and  rulers,  civil  as  well  as  ecclesias- 
tical, who  being  themselves  but  fallible  and  uninspired  men,  have  as- 
sumed dominion  over  the  faith  of  others,  setting  up  their  own  opinions 
and  modes  of  thinking  as  the  only  true  and  infallible,  and  as  such  en- 
deavoring to  impose  them  on  others,  hath  established  and  maintained 
false  religions  over  the  greatest  part  of  the  world,  and  through  all  time  ; 
that  to  compel  a  man  to  furnish  contributions  of  money  for  the  propaga- 
tions of  opinions  which  he  disbelieves,  is  sinful  and  tyrannical ;  that 
even  the  forcing  him  to  support  this  or  that  teacher  of  his  own  religious 
persuasion,  is  depriving  him  of  the  comfortable  liberty  of  giving  his 
contributions  to  the  particular  pastor  whose  morals  he  would  make  his 
pattern,  and  whose  powers  he  feels  most  persuasive  to  righteousness, 
and  is  "withdrawing  from  the  ministry  those  temporal  rewards  which, 
proceeding  from  an  approbation  of  their  personal  conduct,  are  an  addi- 
tional incitement  to  earnest  and  unremitting  labors  for  the  instruc- 
tion of  mankind ;  that  our  civil  rights  have  no  dependence  on  our 
religions  opinions,  more  than  our  opinions  in  physics  or  geometry  ;  that, 
therefore,  the  proscribing  any  citizen  as  unworthy  the  public  confidence 
by  laying  upon  him  an  incapacity  of  being  called  to  the  offices  of  trust 
and  emolument,  unless  he  profess  or  renounce  this  or  that  religious 
opinion,  is  depriving  him  injuriously  of  those  privileges  and  advantages 
to  which,  in  common  with  his  fellow-citizens,  he  has  a  natural  right ; 
that  it  tends  also  to  corrupt  the  principles  of  that  very  religion  it  is 
meant  to  encourage,  by  bribing,  with  a  monopoly  of  worldly  honors  and 
emoluments,  those  who  will  externally  profess  and  conform  to  it  ;  that 
though  indeed  these  are  criminal  who  do  not  withstand  such  tempta- 
tion, yet  neither  are  those  innocent  who  lay  the  bait  in  their  way  ;  that 
to  suffer  the  civil  magistrate  to  intrude  his  powers  into  the  field  of  opin- 
ion and  to  restrain  the  profession  or  propagation  of  principles,  on  the 
supposition  of  their  ill  tendency,  is  a  dangerous  fallacy,  which  at  once 
destroys  all  religious  liberty,  because  he  being  of  course  joidge  of  that 
tendency,  will  make  his  opinions  the  rule  of  judgment,  and  approve  or 
condemn  the  sentiments  of  others  only  as  they  shall  square  with  or 
differ  from  his  own  ;  that  it  is  time  enough  for  the  rightful  purposes  of 
civil  government  for  its  officers  to  interfere  when  principles  break  out 
into  overt  actions  against  peace  and  good  order  ;  and,  finally,  that  truth 
is  great,  and  will  prevail  if  left  to  herself ;  that  she  is  the  proper  and 


094  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

sufficient  antagonist  to  error,  and  has  nothing  to  fear  from  the  conflict, 
unless  by  human  interposition  disarmed  of  her  natural  weapons,  free 
argument  and  debate,  errors  ceasing  to  be  dangerous  when  it  is  per- 
mitted freely  to  contradict  them. 

"  Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly,  that  no  man  shall  be 
compelled  to  frequent  or  support  any  religious  worship,  place,  or  minis- 
try whatsoever,  nor  shall  be  enforced,  restrained,  molested,  or  burthened 
in  his  body  or  goods,  nor  shall  otherwise  suffer  on  account  of  his  relig- 
ious opinions  or  belief  ;  but  that  all  men  shall  be  free  to  profess,  and  by 
argument  to  maintain,  their  opinions  in  matters  of  religion,  and  that  the 
same  shall  in  no  wise  diminish,  enlarge,  or  affect  their  civil  capacities. 

"And  though  we  well  know  that  this  Assembly,  elected  by  the 
people  for  the  ordinary  purposes  of  legislation  only,  have  no  power  to 
restrain  the  acts  of  succeeding  Assemblies,  constituted  with  the  powers 
equal  to  our  own,  and  that  therefore  to  declare  this  act  irrevocable, 
would  be  of  no  effect  in  law,  yet  we  are  free  to  declare,  and  do  declare, 
that  the  rights  hereby  asserted  are  of  the  natural  rights  of  mankind,  and 
that  if  arfy  act  shall  be  hereafter  passed  to  repeal  the  present  or  to  narrow 
its  operation,  such  act  will  be  an  infringement  of  natural  right."12 

Now  during  this  very  time  events  were  shaping  and  plans 
were  being  laid  for  the  formation  of  a  federal  government 
for  the  American  Union,  to  take  the  place  of  the  helpless 
Confederation  of  States,  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  to 
James  Madison,  more  than  to  any  other  single  individual, 
except  perhaps  George  Washington,  is  due  the  credit  of 
bringing  it  all  to  a  happy  issue.  And  these  contests  in 
Virginia,  by  which  there  had  been  severed  the  illicit  and 
corrupting  connection  between  religion  and  the  State,  had 
awakened  the  public  mind  and  prepared  the  way  for  the 
formation  of  a  Constitution  which  would  pledge  the  nation 
to  a  complete  separation  from  all  connection  with  religion  in 
any  way.  Accordingly,  the  Constitution,  as  originally  pro- 
posed by  the  convention,  declared  on  this  point  that  "no 
religious  test  shall  ever  be  required  as  a  qualification  to  any 
office  or  public  trust  under  the  United  States."  Yet  this 
was  not  allowed  by  the  people  of  the  States  to  be  enough. 
One  of  the  objections  that  was  urged  oftenest  and  strongest 

12/d.,  pp.  23-26. 


RATIFICATION  OF   THE   CONSTITUTION. 

was  that  it  did  not   make  the  freedom    of   religion    secure 
enough. 

In  the  Virginia  Convention  for  the  ratification  of  the 
Constitution,  Madison  said  :  — 

"There  is  not  a  shadow  of  right  in  the  general  government  to  inter- 
meddle with  religion.  Its  least  interference  with  it  would  be  a  most 
flagrant  usurpation.  I  can  appeal  to  my  uniform  conduct  on  this  sub- 
ject, that  I  have  warmly  supported  religious  freedom.  It  is  better  that 
this  security  should  be  depended  upon  from  the  general  legislature, 
than  from  one  particular  State.  A  particular  State  might  concur  in  one 
religious  project." 1S 

In  the  Massachusetts  Convention,  there  was  objection 
made  to  the  clause  prohibiting  a  religious  test,  that  "  there  is 
no  provision  that  men  in  power  should  have  any  religion  ;  a 
papist  or  an  infidel  is  as  eligible  as  Christians."  To  this  a 
minister  replied,  "No  conceivable  advantage  to  the  whole 
will  result  from  a  test."  Another  said,  "It  would  be  happy 
for  the  United  States  if  our  public  men  were  to  be  of  those 
who  have  a  good  standing  in  the  church."  Again,  a  minis- 
ter replied,  "Human  tribunals  for  the  consciences  of  men 
are  impious  encroachments  upon  the  prerogatives  of  God. 
A  religious  test,  as  a  qualification  for  office,  would  have  been 
a  great  blemish."14  And  Elder  Isaac  Backus,  the  Baptist 
minister,  whose  "Church  History  of  New  England"  we 
have  quoted  in  this  book,  said  :  — 

"Mr.  President,  I  have  said  very  little  to  this  honorable  convention  ; 
but  I  now  beg  leave  to  offer  a  few  thoughts  upon  some  points  in  the 
Constitution  proposed  to  us,  and  I  shall  begin  with  the  exclusion  of  any 
religious  test.  Many  appear  to  be  much  concerned  about  it ;  but  nothing 
is  more  evident,  both  in  reason  and  the  Holy  Scriptures,  than  that  relig- 
ion is  ever  a  matter  between  God  and  individuals  ;  and,  therefore,  no  man 
or  men  can  impose  any  religious  test  without  invading  the  essential  prerog- 
atives of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Ministers  first  assumed  this  power  un- 
der the  Christian  name  :  and  then  Constantine  approved  of  the  practice 

13  Id.,  p.  44. 

14  Bancroft's  "  History  of  the  Formation  of  the  Constitution,"  book  iv,  chap, 
iii,  par.  17. 


696  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

when  lie  'adopted  the  profession  of  Christianity  as  an  engine  of  State 
policy.  And  let  the  history  of  all  nations  be  searched  from  that  day  to 
this,  and  it  will  appear  that  the  imposing  of  religious  tests  has  been  the 
greatest  engine  of  tyranny  in  the  world.  And  I  rejoice  to  see  so  many 
gentlemen  who  are  now  giving  in  their  rights  of  conscience  in  this  great 
and  important  matter.  Some  serious  minds  discover  a  concern  lest  if  all 
religious  test  should  be  excluded,  the  Congress  would  hereafter  establish 
popery,  or  some  other  tyrannical  way  of  worship.  But  it  is  most  certain 
that  no  such  way  of  worship  can  be  established  without  any  religious 
test."15 

New  York,  Pennsylvania,  New  Hampshire,  Virginia, 
and  North  Carolina,  all  proposed  amendments  more  fully  to 
secure  religious  rights.  The  first  Congress  under  the  Con- 
stitution met  March  4,  1789,  and  in  September  of  the  same 
year  the  first  Amendment  was  adopted,  declaring  that 
"Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment 
of  religion,  or4prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof."  And 
in  1797  the  treaty  with  Tripoli  was  framed  by  an  ex-Con- 
gregational clergyman,  signed  by  President  Washington, 
and  approved  by  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  declaring 
that  ''the  government  of  the  United  States  is  not,  in  any 
sense,  founded  on  the  Christian  religion." 

This  completed  the  testimony  of  the  supreme  law  of  the 
land,  expressive  of  the  will  of  the  American  people  that 
the  government  of  the  United  States  is,  and  of  rigid  ought  to 

be,  FREE  AND  INDEPENDENT  OF  ALL  ECCLESIASTICAL  OR  RELIGIOUS 
CONNECTION,  INTERFERENCE,  OR  CONTROL.  And  the  proof  18 

abundant  and  absolutely  conclusive,  that  it  was  all  in- 
tentional, and  that  it  was  altogether  out  of  respect  for 
Christianity  and  the  inalienable  rights  of  men. 

Much  has  been  said  —  none  too  much  —  of  the  wisdom 
of  our  fathers  who  set  to  the  world  this  glorious  example. 
Yet  in  this  particular  thing  it  would  be  an  impeachment  of 
their  common  sense  to  suppose  they  could  have  done  other- 
wise. They  had  before  them  the  history  of  the  world, 
pagan,  papal,  and  Protestant,  from  the  cross  of  Christ  to  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  and,  with  the  exception  of 

15Blakely's  "  American  State  Papers,"  p.  45. 


THE   CHRISTIAN  IDEA.  697 

the  feeble  example  of  toleration  in  Holland,  and  of  religious 
freedom  in  Rhode  Island,  all  the  way  it  was  one  uninter- 
rupted course  of  suffering  and  torture  of  the  innocent ;  of  op- 
pression, riot,  bloodshed,  and  anarchy  by  the  guilty  ;  and 
tall  as  the  result  of  the  alliance  of  religion  and  the  State. 

The  simplest  process  of  deduction  would  teach  them  that 
it  could  not  be  altogether  an  experiment  to  try  the  total 
separation  of  the  two,  for  it  would  be  impossible  for  any 
system  of  government  without  such  a  union,  to  be  worse 
than  all  so  far  had  proved  with  such  union. 

Our  fathers  were  indeed  wise,  and  it  was  that  sort  of  wis- 
dom that  is  the  most  profitable  and  the  rarest  —  the  wisdom 
of  common  sense.  From  all  that  was  before  them  they 
could  see  that  the  State  dominating  religion  and  using  relig- 
ion for  State  purposes,  is  the  pagan  idea  of  government ; 
that  religion  dominating  the  State  and  using  the  civil  power 
for  religious  purposes,  is  the  papal  ideapf  government  ;  that 
both  these  ideas  had  been  followed  in  the  history  of  Protest- 
antism ;  therefore  they  decided  to  steer  clear  of  both,  and  by 
a  clear-cut  and  distinct  separation  of  religion  and  the  State, 
establish  the  government  of  the  United  States  upon  THE 
CHRISTIAN  IDEA. 

Accordingly  we  can  no  more  fittingly  close  this  chapter 
than  by  quoting  the  noble  tribute  paid  by  the  historian  of 
the  United  States  Constitution,  to  the  principles  of  that 
grandest  symbol  of  human  government,  and  "most  wonder- 
ful work  ever  struck  off  at  a  given  time  by  the  brain  and  pur- 
pose of  man." 

"In  the  earliest  States  known  to  history,  government  and 
religion  were  one  and  indivisible.  Each  State  had  its 
special  deity,  and  often  these  protectors,  one  after  another, 
might  be  overthrown  in  battle,  never  to  rise  again.  The 
Peloponnesian  War  grew  out  of  a  strife  about  an  oracle. 
Rome,  as  it  sometimes  adopted  into  citizenship  those  whom 
it  vanquished,  introduced,  in  like  manner,  and  with  good 
logic  for  that  day,  the  worship  of  their  gods. 


698  THE  NEW  REPUBLIC. 

"No  one  thought  of  vindicating  religion  for  the  con- 
science of  the  individual,  till  a  voice  in  Judea,  breaking  day 
for  the  greatest  epoch  in  the  life  of  humanity,  by  establish- 
ing a  pure,  spiritual,  and  universal  religion  for  all  mankirid, 
enjoined  to  render  to  Caesar  only  that  which  is  Caesar's.  * 
The  rule  was  upheld  during  the  infancy  of  the  gospel  for  all 
men.  No  sooner  was  this  religion  adopted  by  the  chief  of 
the  Roman  empire,  than  it  was  shorn  of  its  character  of 
universality,  and  enthralled  by  an  unholy  connection  with 
the  unholy  State  ;  and  so  it  continued  till  the  new  nation, — 
the  least  defiled  with  the  barren  scoffings  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  the  most  general  believer  in  Christianity  of  any 
people  of  that  age,  the  chief  heir  of  the  Reformation  in  its 
purest  forms, —  when  it  came  to  establish  a  government  for 
the  United  States,  refused  to  treat  faith  as  a  matter  to  be 
regulated  by  a  corporate  body,  or  having  a  headship  in  a 
monarch  or  a  State.  • 

"Vindicating  the  right  of  individuality  even  in  religion, 
and  in  religion  above  all,  the  new  nation  dared  to  set  the 
example  of  accepting  in  its  relations  to  God  the  principle 
first  divinely  ordained  of  God  in  Judea.  It  left  the  man- 
agement of  temporal  things  to  the  temporal  power  ;  but  the 
American  Constitution,  in  harmony  with  the  people  of  the 
several  States,  withheld  from  the  Federal  government  the 
power  to  invade  the  home  of  reason,  the  citadel  of  con- 
science, the  sanctuary  of  the  soul ;  and  not  from  indiffer- 
ence, but  that  the  infinite  Spirit  of  eternal  truth  might  move 
in  its  freedom  and  purity  and  power. "-  —Bancroft.  u 

Thus  with  "perfect  individuality  extended  to  conscience," 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  as  it  is,  stands 
as  the  sole  monument  of  all  history  representing  the 
principle  which  Christ  established  for  earthly  government. 
And  under  it,  in  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  in  enlighten- 
ment, and  in  progress,  this  nation  has  deservedly  stood  as 
the  beacon  light  of  the  world,  for  more  than  a  hundred  years. 


16  "  History  of  the  Formation  of  the  Constitution,"  book  v,  chap,  i,  par.  10, 11. 


CHAPTER   XXV. 


THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

IT  would  seem  that  all  people  in  the  United  States  would 
be  glad  of  the  opportunity  to  rejoice  evermore  that  by  its 
supreme  law  this  nation  was  pledged  to  religious  freedom. 
It  would  seem  that  everybody  ought  to  be  glad  of  the  oppor- 
tunity to  herald  to  all  the  world  the  fame  of  a  nation  under 
whose  protection  all  people  might  dwell  wholly  unmolested 
in  the  full  enjoyment  of  religious  rights  and  the  liberty  to 
worship  or  not  to  worship  according  to  the  dictates  of  their 
own  consciences. 

Such,  however,  is  not  the  case.  As  religious  bigotry 
knows  no  such  thing  as  enlightenment  or  progress  ;  as  eccle- 
siastical ambition  never  can  be  content  without  the  power  to 
persecute  ;  so  from  the  beginning,  complaint  has  been  made 
against  the  character  of  the  United  States  Constitution  as 
it  respects  religion,  and  constant  effort  has  been  made  to 
weaken  its  influence,  undermine  its  authority,  and  subvert 
its  precepts. 

From  the  very  beginning,  this  feature  of  the  Constitu- 
tion has  been  denounced  as  foolish,  atheistical,  the  strictly 
national  sin,  and  the  cause  of  epidemics,  etc.,  particularly 
by  ministers  of  such  religion  as  had  not  sufficient  power  of 
truth  to  support  itself,  and  doctors  of  a  divinity  so  weak 
and  sickly  that  it  could  not  protect  itself,  much  less  protect 
and  bless  its  worshipers  or  anybody  else. 

October  27,  1789,  "The  First  Presbytery  Eastward  in 
Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire,"  sent  to  President 
Washington  an  address  in  which  they  complained  because 

[699J 


700  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

there  was  no  "explicit  acknowledgment  of  the  only  true 
God  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  he  has  sent,  inserted  some- 
where in  the  Magna  Charta  of  our  country."  September 
20,  1T93,  in  a  sermon  preached  in  New  York  City  on  a  fast 
day  on  account  of  the  yellow  fever  in  Philadelphia,  and 
entitled  "  Divine  Judgments,"  Dr.  John  M.  Mason  magni- 
fied the  "irreligious  "  feature  of  the  Constitution  as  one  of 
the  chief  causes  of  the  calamities  of  which  he  was  speaking. 
He  solemnly  observed  that  had  "  such  momentous  business" 
as  forming  a  Constitution,  been  transacted  by  Mohamme- 
dans, or  even  the  savages,  they  would  have  done  it  "in  the 
name  of  God"  or  "paid  some  homage  to  the  Great  Spirit." 
Yes,  that  is  all  true  enough  ;  and  their  god  would  have 
been  as  cruel  and  savage  as  the  Mohammedan  and  other 
national  gods  have  always  been.  But  happily  for  us  and  all 
the  rest  of  the  world,  the  noble  men  who  framed  the  Con- 
stitution were  neither  Mohammedans  nor  savages.  They 
were  men  enlightened  by  the  principles  and  precepts  of 
Christianity,  arid  by  a  knowledge  of  history  ;  and  were  en- 
dowed with  respect  for  the  rights  of  men. 

In  1803  Samuel  B.  Wylie,  D.  D.,  of  the  University  of 
Pennsylvania,  preached  a  sermon  in  which  he  inquired  : 
"Did  not  the  framers  of  this  instrument  ...  in  this  re- 
semble the  fool  mentioned  in  Ps.  xiv,  1,  3,  who  said  in  his 
heart,  '  There  is  no  God '  2  "  In  1811  Samuel  Austin,  D.  D., 
a  New  England  Congregationalist,  afterward  president  of 
the  University  of  Vermont,  preached  a  sermon  in  Worcester, 
Mass.,  in  which  he  declared  that  this  "  capital  defect  "  in  the 
national  Constitution  "will  issue  inevitably  in  the  destruc- 
tion" of  the  nation. 

In  1812  President  Dwight  of  Yale  College  preached  a 
sermon  in  me  college  chapel,  in  which  he  lamented  the  fail- 
ure of  the  Constitution  to  recognize  a  God,  declaring  that 
"we  commenced  our  national  existence,  under  the  present 
system,  without  God."  The  next  year  he  recurred  to  the 
same  thing,  saying  that  "the  grossest  nations  and  individ- 


THE   CONSTITUTION  DENOUNCED. 

uals,  in  their  public  acts  and  in  their  declarations,  manifes- 
toes, proclamations,  etc.,  always  recognize  the  superinten- 
dency  of  a  Supreme  Being.  Even  Napoleon  did  it."  Of 
course  Napoleon  did  it.  It  is  such  characters  as  he  that  are 
most  likely  to  do  it  ;  and  then,  having  covered  himself  with 
the  hypocritical  panoply,  to  ruin  kingdoms,  desolate  nations, 
and  violate  every  precept  of  morality  and  every  principle  of 
humanity.  Yes,  Napoleon  did  it  ;  and  so  did  Charlemagne 
before  him,  and  Clovis,  and  Justinian,  and  Theodosius,  and 
Constantino,  to  say  nothing  of  hundreds  of  the  popes. 
But  the  fathers  of  this  republic  were  not  such  as  any  of 
these,  the  noblest  pledge  of  which  is  the  character  of  the 
Constitution  as  it  respects  religion,  for  all  of  which  every 
Christian  can  most  reverently  thank  the  God  and  Father  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

In  1819,  on  a  thanksgiving  day  appointed  by  the  governor 
of  Pennsylvania,  Dr.  Duffield  preached  a  sermon  at  Carlisle, 
in  which  lie  declared  the  Constitution  "  entirely  atheistical." 
Other  such  testimonies  as  the  foregoing  might  be  given  to  a 
wearisome  extent,  but  with  one  more  these  must  suffice.1  In 
1859  Prof.  J.  H.  Mcllvaine,  D.  D.,  of  the  College  of  New 
Jersey,  known  also  as  Princeton  College,  published  an  arti- 
cle in  the  Princeton  Itevieio  for  October,  in  which  he  really 
lamented  that  "the  practical  effect"  of  the  Constitution  as  it 
is,  with  respect  to  religion,  "  is  the  neutrality  of  the  govern- 
ment with  respect  to  all  religion  ;  "  and  seemed  much  to  be 
grieved  "that  no  possible  governmental  influence  can  be  con- 
stitutionally exerted  for  or  against  any  form  of  religious  be- 
lief." If  only  our  fathers  in  forming  the  national  govern- 
ment and  making  the  Constitution,  had  created  a  national 
god  and  established  its  worship  under  penalties  of  fine, 
imprisonment,  whipping,  branding,  banishment,  or  death, 


1  The  reader  will  find  these  and  many  others  like  them  in  the  "Proceed, 
ings  of  the  Fifth  National  Reform  Convention,"  held  in  Pittsburg,  February  4,  5, 
1874,  issued  by  the  National  Reform  Association,  and  sold  by  the  Christian 
Statesman  Publishing  Company,  Pittsburg,  Pa. 


702  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

and  had  drawn  up  a  national  creed  so  that  the  question  of 
orthodoxy,  with  all  its  riotous  and  bloody  accompaniments, 
could  have  been  the  grand  issue  in  every  congressional  or 
presidential  election,  no  doubt  all  these  distressed  doctors  of 
divinity  would  have  been  delighted.  Fortunately  for  the 
country  and  for  the  human  race,  the  noble  men  who  estab- 
lished this  government  had  in  view  the  protection  and  preser- 
vation of  the  inalienable  rights  of  all  the  people,  rather 
than  the  clothing  of  religious  bigots  with  governmental  power 
to  force  upon  others  their  false  religious  views. 

So  far,  however,  all  these  criticisms  and  denunciations 
had  been  merely  individual.  Though  they  were  strongly 
seconded  by  the  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive  authori- 
ties in  almost  all  the  States,  there  was  as  yet  no  organized 
attack  upon  the  Constitution,  or  regular  war  upon  its  prin- 
ciples. But  in  1863  such  an  organization  was  effected  and 
such  a  war  was  begun.  In  February  of  that  year,  ."  A  con- 
vention for  prayer  and  Christian  conference "  was  held  in 
Xenia,  Ohio,  to  consider  in  particular  the  state  of  the  coun- 
try. It  was  composed  of  representatives  of  eleven  different 
religious  denominations  from  seven  States.  The  convention 
met  February  3,  and  on  the  fourth,  Mr.  John  Alexander, .  a 
United  Presbyterian  and  covenanter,  then  of  Xenia,  later 
and  now  (1891)  of  Philadelphia,  presented  for  the  consider- 
ation of  the  Convention,  a  paper  in  which  he  bewailed  the 
"human  frailty  and  ingratitude"  of  the  makers  of  the  Con- 
stitution, and  deplored  the  national  sin  of  which  they  and  all 
their  posterity  were  guilty,  because  they  had  "well-nigh  legis- 
lated God  out  of  the  government ; "  and  closed  with  the  fol- 
lowing words  :  — 

"We  regard  the  Emancipation  Proclamation  of  the  President  and  his 
recommendation  to  purge  the  Constitution  of  slavery,  as  among  the 
most  hopeful  signs  of  the  times.  . 

"We  regard  the  neglect  of  God  and  his  law,  by  omitting  all  acknowl- 
edgment of  them  in  our  Constitution,  as  the  crowning,  original  sin  of  the 
nation,  and  slavery  as  one  of  its  natural  outgrowths.  Therefore  the 
most  important  step  remains  yet  to  be  taken, —  to  amend  the  Constitu- 


A   RELIGIOUS  AMENDMENT  PROPOSED.  703 

lion  so  as  to  acknowledge  God  and  the  authority  of  his  law  ;  and  the 
object  of  this  paper  is  to  suggest  to  this  convention  the  propriety  of  con- 
sidering this  subject,  and  of  preparing  such  an  amendment  to  the  Consti- 
tution as  they  may  think  proper  to  propose  in  accordance  with  its 
provisions. 

"  In  order  to  bring  the  subject  more  definitely  before  the  convention, 
we  suggest  the  following  as  an  outline  of  what  seems  to  us  to  be  needed 
in  the  preamble  of  that  instrument,  making  it  read  as  follows  (proposed 
amendment  in  brackets) :  — 

"  WE,  THE  PEOPLE  OP  THE  UNITED  STATES,  [recognizing  the  being 
and  attributes  of  Almighty  God,  the  Divine  Authority  of  the  Holy  Script- 
ures, the  law  of  God  as  the  paramount  rule,  and  Jesus,  the  Messiah,  the 
Saviour  and  Lord  of  all,]  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect  union,  establish 
justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense, 
promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  our- 
selves and  to  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution  for 
the  United  States  of  America." 

The  convention  approved  the  spirit  and  design  of  the  pa- 
per, and  ordered  its  publication.  The  following  July  4-,  "a 
few  delegates "  met  in  Pittsburg,  issued  an  address  to  the 
country,  and  formed  a  plan  for  the  calling  of  a  National 
Convention,  which  met  in  Allegheny,  January  27,  1864.  It 
is  reported  as  "an  earnest,  prayerful,  and  most  encouraging 
meeting."  It  adopted  a  series  of  resolutions  and  a  memo- 
rial to  Congress,  which  latter  is  worth  quoting,  as  showing 
the  rapid  growth  of  their  designs  upon  the  national  Consti- 
tution. It  runs  as  follows  :— 

"  To  the  Honorable,  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives,  in  Congress 

assembled : — 

"We,  citizens  of  the  United  States,  respectfully  ask  your  Honorable 
bodies  to  adopt  measures  for  amending  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  so  as  to  read  in  substance  as  follows: — 

"  'We,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  [humbly  acknowledging  Al- 
mighty God  as  the  source  of-  all  authority  and  power  in  civil  government, 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Ruler  among  the  nations,  and  his  revealed  will 
as  the  supreme  law  of  the  laud,  in  order  to  constitute  a  Christian  govern- 
ment], and  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect  union,  establish  justice,  insure 
domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote  the  gen- 
eral welfare,  [and  secure  the  inalienable  rights  and  the  blessings  of  life. 


704  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness  to  ourselves,  our  posterity,  and  all 
the  people,]  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Constitution  for  the  United 
States  of  America, 

"  'And  further  :  that  such  changes  with  respect  to  the  oath  of  office, 
slavery,  and  all  other  matters,  should  be  introduced  into  the  body  of  the 
Constitution,  as  may  be  necessary  to  give  effect  to  these  amendments  in 
the  preamble.  And  we,  your  humble  petitioners,  will  ever  pray,'"  etc. 

"Resolved,  That  a  special  committee  be  appointed  to  carry  the  Me- 
morial to  Washington,  lay  it  before  the  President,  and  endeavor  to  get  a 
special  message  to  Congress  on  the  subject,  and  to  lay  said  Memorial  be- 
fore Congress." 

The  Prof.  J.  H.  Me Ilvaine,'  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  before  re- 
ferred to,  was  made  chairman  of  this  special  committee  ;  and, 
as  may  well  be  supposed,  was  a  diligent  agent  in  this  par- 
ticular office,  as  well  as  an  earnest  worker  for  the  bad  cause, 
till  the  day  of  his  death. 

At  this  Allegheny  meeting  a  permanent  organization  was 
effected,  called  "The  National  Association  to  Secure  the  Re- 
ligious Amendment  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,"  with  Mr.  John  Alexander  as  the  first  president,  and 
Zadok  Street,  a  Quaker,  as  vice-president.2 

It  is  not  necessary  to  trace  the  particulars  of  the  thing 
any  farther  ;  suffice  it  to  say  that  a  national  convention  has 
been  held  each  year  since  in  the  principal  eastern  cities  — 
Pittsburg,  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Washington,  and  as  far 
west  as  Cincinnati.  The  official  organ  of  the  Association  is 
the  Christian  Statesman,  established  in  1867,  and  published 
in  Pittsburg,  Pa.  In  the  latest  official  manual  of  the  associ- 
ation— 1894  —  we  find  that  the  president  is  Hon.  Felix  R. 
Brniiot,  of  Pittsburg,  who  has  held  the  office  since  1869  ;  that 
there  are  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  vice-presidents,  from 
thirty  States,  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  Utah,  among 
whom  are  eleven  bishops,  twelve  college  presidents  and  three 
ex-college  presidents,  eleven  college  professors,  four  ex-gov- 

2  In  lending  his  name  and  influence  to  this  Association,  Mr.  Street  seems  to 
have  forgotten  the  experiences  of  his  denominational  ancestors  In  New  England 
under  a  government  with  which  that  which  is  now  proposed  by  this  Association 
is  identical. 


THE  NATIONAL  REFORM  ASSOCIATION.  705 

ernors,  three  editors, —  Drinkhouse  of  the  Methodist-Protes- 
tant, Baltimore  ;  Fitzgerald  of  the  Christian  Advocate,  Nash- 
ville;3 and  Howard  of  .the  Cumberland  Presbyterian,  Nash- 
ville,—  and  such  a  store  of  Reverends,  D.  D.'s,  LL.  D.'s 
and  Rev.  D.  D.'s  and  Rev.  D.  D.  LL.  D.'s,  that  we  cannot 
take  the  time  or  space  to  designate  them  ;  though  it  may  not 
be  amiss  to  mention  such  well-known  names  as  Joseph  Cook 
of  Boston ;  President  Seelye  of  Amherst,  Dr.  T.  L.  Cuyler 
of  Brooklyn,  and  Herrick  Johnson  of  Chicago.  Besides  all 
these,  there  is  an  executive  committee  of  eighteen,  and  seven 
district  secretaries.  Article  II  of  the  constitution  of  the  as- 
sociation reads  as  follows  :  — 

"  The  object  of  this  society  shall  be  to  maintain  existing  Christian 
features  in  the  American  government ;  to  promote  needed  reforms  in  the 
action  of  the  government  touching  the  Sabbath,  the  institution  of  the 
family,  the  religious  element  in  education,  the  oath,  and  public  moral- 
ity as  affected  by  the  liquor  traffic  and  other  kindred  evils  ;  and  to  se- 
cure such  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  as  will 
declare  the  nation's  allegiance  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  its  acceptance  of  the 
moral  laws  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  so  indicate  that  this  is  a 
Christian  nation,  and  place  all  the  Christian  laws,  institutions,  and 
usages  of  our  government  on  an  undeniable  legal  basis  in  the  fundamen- 
tal law  of  the  land." 

Now  it  is  evident  that  were  these  principles  adopted  as 
the  legal  basis  of  the  government,  none  but  professed  Chris- 
tians could  hold  any  office  or  place  of  trust  under  the  gov- 
ernment. And  it  is  just  as  certainly  evident  that  the  conse- 
quence would  be  that  every  political  hack,  every  demagogue, 
every  unprincipled  politician,  in  the  United  States  would  be- 
come a  professed  Christian  ;  and  every  popular  religious 
body  would  be  joined  by  a  horde  of  hypocrites.  But  instead 
of  trembling  at  such  a  prospect,  the  National  Reformers  act- 
ually rejoice  at  it.  In  the  National  Reform  Convention 
held  at  Cincinnati,  January  31  to  February  1,  1872,  "Rev." 

3Dr.  Fitzgerald -has  also  been  made  a  bishop  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  South.  This  makes  the  number  of  bishop  vice-presidents  twelve. 


706  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

T.  P.  Stevenson,  corresponding  secretary  of  the  Association 
and  editor  of  the  Christian  Statesman,  delivered  an  address 
in  which  he  said  :  — 

"The  acknowledgment,  in  the  terms  of  the  proposed  Amendment 
or  any  similar  terms,  of  the  revealed  will  of  God  as  of  supreme  author- 
ity, would  make  the  law  I  have  quoted  from  the  Bible  [Ex.  xviii,  21], 
supreme  law  in  this  land,  and  candidates  and  constituencies  would  gov- 
ern themselves  accordingly.  If  it  be  objected  that  men  would  become 
hypocrites  to  obtain  office,  we  can  only  say  that  the  hypocrisy  which  ab- 
stains  from  blasphemy  and  licentiousness,  and  conforms  the  outward  life 
to  the  morality  of  the  Christian  religion,  is  a  species  of  hypocrisy 
which  we  are  exceedingly  anxious  to  cultivate,  and  which  all  our  laws 
restraining  immorality  are  adapted  and  intended  to  produce." 

And  in  the  Christian  Statesman,  of  November  1,  1883, 
"Ilev."  "W.  J.  Coleman,  one  of  the  principal  exponents  of 
the  National  Reform  religion,  replied  to  some  questions  that 
had  been  put  by  a  correspondent  who  signed  himself 
"Truth  Seeker."  We  copy  the  following  :  — 

"  What  effect  would  the  adoption  of  the  Christian  Amendment,  to- 
gether with  the  proposed  changes  in  the  Constitution,  have  upon  those 
who  deny  that  God  is  the  Sovereign,  Christ  the  Ruler,  and  the  Bible  the 
law?  This  brings  up  the  conscience  question  at  once.  .  .  .  The  classes 
who  would  object  are,  as  'Trulh  Seeker'  has  said,  Jews,  infidels,  atheists, 
and  others.  These  classes  are  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  Constitution  as 
it  is.  How  would  they  stand  toward  it  if  it  recognized  the  authority  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ?  To  be  perfectly  plain,  I  believe  that  the  exist- 
ence of  a  Christian  Constitution  would  disfranchise  every  logically  con- 
sistent infidel."3 

Notice,  it  is  only  the  logically  consistent  dissenter  that 
would  be  disfranchised.  By  the  same  token,  then,  the  log- 
ically z'^consistent  could  all  be  citizens.  That  is,  the  man  of 
honest  intention,  of  firm  conviction,  and  of  real  principle, 
who  valued  his  principles  more  than  he  did  political  prefer- 
ment, would  be  disfranchised  ;  while  the  time-servers,  the 
men  of  no  convictions  and  of  no  principle,  could  all  be 
acceptable  citizens.  In  other  words,  the  honest  man,  if  he 
be  a  dissenter,  could  not  be  a  citizen  ;  but  every  hypocrite 

3  Dr.  Me  Allister  also  before  U.  S.  Senate  Committee,  March  6,  1894. 


PROPOSED  NATIONAL  HYPOCRISY.  7Q7 

could  be  a  citizen.  Therefore  the  inevitable  result  of  the 
National  Reform  theory  and  purpose  is  to  put  a  premium 
upon  hypocrisy.4  And  through  it  the  professed  Christian 
churches  of  the  country  would  become,  in  fact,  that  which 
the  Revelation  has  shown  in  prophecy,  "the  hold  of  every 
foul  spirit,  and  a  cage  of  every  unclean  and  hateful  bird." 
Rev.  xviii,  2. 

The  word  of  God  says,  "Whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is 
sin."  Rom.  xiv,  23.  Even  the  voluntary  doing  of  any 
duty  toward  God,  without  faith,  is  sin  ;  and  to  compel  men^ 
to  do  it  is  nothing  else  than  to  compel  them  to  commit 
sin.  More  than  this,  to  proffer  obedience  to  God,  from 
interested  motives,  is  sin  and  hypocrisy.  Now  the  National 
Reform  scheme  proposes  to  offer  political  inducements  to 
men  to  proffer  obedience  to  God.  The  National  Reform 
scheme  does  propose  to  have  every  member  of 'the  State  prof- 
fer*  service  to  God,  and  conform  to  religious  observances, 
from  none  other  than  interested  motives.  For  men  to  tender 
obedience  or  homage  to  God,  while  they  have  no  love  for 
him  in  their  hearts,  is  both  to  dishonor  him  and  to  do  violence 
to  their  own  nature.  And  to  bribe  or  compel  men  to  do  this 
very  thing,  is  the  direct  aim  of  the  National  Reform  Associ- 
ation. Its  success  therefore  would  so  increase  hypocrisy  and 
multiply  sin,  under  the  cloak  of  godliness,  that  national  ruin 
would  as  certainly  follow  as  it  did  the  same  system  practiced 
upon  the  Roman  empire. 

From  the  proposition  made  in  the  memorial  to  Congress 
—  to  change  the  body  of  the  Constitution  so  as  to  fit  their 
proposed  preamble  —  it  will  be  seen  that  if  their  purpose 
could  be  made  effective,  there  would  not  be  left  enough  of 
the  Constitution  as  it  now  is  to  be  of  any  use  to  anybody. 
According  to  their  purpose,  the  Bible,  as  the  revealed  will  of 
Christ  who  is  to  be  made  the  Ruler,  is  to  be  the  supreme 
law.  That  in  effect,  then,  would  become  the  Constitution. 
Then  this  supreme  law  would  necessarily  need  to  be  authori- 
tatively interpreted.  They  are  all  ready  for  this,  however. 

4  See  pages  297,  298  of  this  book. 
53 


708  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

They  have  the  whole  scheme  completed.  They  know  that 
the  changes  which  they  propose,  mean  much  :  but  above  all 
things  else  that  they  intend  that  these  changes  shall  bring 
about,  is  the  putting  of  the  clergy  in  the  place  of  the  su- 
preme interpreter  of  the  new  supreme  law  of  the  land.  In 
the  Christian  Statesman  of  February  21,  1884,  one  of  their 
leaders,  the  "Rev."  J.  C.  K.  Milligan,  announced  the  fol- 
lowing program  :  — 

"  The  changes  will  come  gradually,  and  probably  only  after  the  whole 
frame-work  of  Bible  legislation  has  been  thoroughly  canvassed  by  Con- 
gress and  State  legislatures,  by  the  Supreme  Courts  of  the  United  States 
and  of  the  several  States,  and  by  lawyers  and  citizens  generally  ;  an  out- 
pouring of  the  Spirit  might  soon  secure  it.  The  churches  and  the  pul- 
pits have  much  to  do  with  shaping  and  forming  opinions  on  all  moral 
questions,  and  with  interpretations  of  Scripture  on  moral  and  civil,  as  well 
as  on  theological  and  ecclesiastical  points  ;  and  it  is  probable  that  in  the 
almost  universal  gathering  of  our  citizens  about  these,  the  chief  discus- 
sions and  the  final  decision  of  most  points  will  be  developed  there. 
'  Many  nations  shall  come,  and  say,  Come,  and  let  us  go  up  to  the  mount- 
ain of  the  Lord,  and  to  the  house  of  the  God  of  Jacob  ;  and  he  will 
teach,  us  of  his  ways,  and  we  will  walk  in  his  paths  ;  for  the  law  shall 
go  forth  of  Zion.'  There  certainly  is  no  class  of  citizens  more  intelli- 
gent, patriotic,  and  trustworthy  than  the  leaders  and  teachers  in  our 
churches." 

This  passage,  the  expressions  of  which  might  easily  be 
paralleled  to  any  extent  from  the  columns  of  the  Christian 
Statesman,  simply  puts  in  condensed  form  the  plans  and  ul- 
timate aims  of  the  National  Reform  Association.  And  by 
it,  it  is  seen  at  once  that  it  is  a  revival  of  the  original 
scheme  of  John  Calvin,  and  is  the  very  image  of  the  papal 
scheme  of  the  fourth  century. 

Compare  with  this,  pages  4-88-490  of  this  book.  Ac- 
cording to  this  National  Reform  scheme,  it  is  intended  once 
more  to  destroy  all  distinction  between  moral  and  civil  af- 
fairs. Once  more  all  things  pertaining  to  the  government  are 
to  be  made  moral,  with  the  clergy  in  the  place  of  interpret- 
ers on  all  points. 


THE   TWO   "SPHERES."  709 

Yet,  like  those  who  made  the  papacy  m  the  first  place, 
they  theorize  learnedly  about  the  two  distinct  "  spheres  "  of 
the  State  and  the  Church.7  According  to  the  theory,  the 
State  is  in  itself  a  moral  person  distinct  from  the  people, 
having  an  individuality  and  a  responsibility  to  God,  of  its 
own.  And  in  its  sphere  it  must  be  religious  and  serve  God, 
and  cause  all  the  people  to  do  likewise  in  its  own  way,  and 
apply  the  moral  law  to  itself  and  everybody  else.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Church  in  her  sphere  must  be  religious  and 
serve  God,  and  cause  all  the  people  to  do  likewise  in  her 
own  way,  and  interpret  the  Scriptures  for  herself  and  the 
State,  and  everybody  else.  "The  evangelist  is  a  minister  of 
God  to  preach,  and  the  magistrate  is  a  minister  of  God 
to  rule;"  yet  both  are  ministers  in  the  mine  field  — 
the  field  of  morals  —  with  this  important  difference,  however, 
the  State  is  to  '"apply"  the  standard  of  morals  —  the 
Scriptures  —  as  interpreted  hy  the  Church.  As  defined  by 
themselves,  it  is  expressed  in  the  following  passage  from  a 
speech  by  I).  McAllister,  13.  D.,  in  the  Washington,  J).  C., 
National  Reform  convention,  April  1-3,  1890.  He  said  :  — 

"Now  what  does  the  National  Reform  Association  say?  It  says, 
'Let  the  church  do  its  duty  in  her  own  line.  Let  the  line  of  demarca- 
tion be  drawn  here  ;  let  the  functions  of  the  State  go  with  the  State  — 
with  civil  government,  God's  own  ordinance.  Let  the  church  hold  the 
moral  principles  of  God's  law,—  the  law  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  perfect 
law,  —  and  let  the  Slate  apply  those  moral  principles  that  pertain  to  its  own 
sphere  of  justice  and  right,  in  her  schools  and  everywhere  clue,  and  do  her 
own  work  as  she  shall  answer  to  God  himself,  as  she  is  the  creature  of 
his  ordaining.'"  [Applause.] 

It  is  yet  more  fully  expressed  in  a  speech  by  "Rev." 
T.  H.  Tatlow  in  a  convention  at  Sedalia,  Mo.,  May  23,  24, 
1889,  as  follows  :  - 

"To  these  crafty  and  carnal  assumptions,  the  spiritual  man,  firm  in 

Christian  principle  and  the  integrity  of  his  convictions,  replies  ,  God's 

jurisdiction  over  man  is  before  and  above  all  others  ;  and  is  wisely  adapted 

toman's  entire  existence  in  all  its  diversified  relationships,  both  as  spirit- 

7  l'a<re  496,  this  book. 


710  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

ual  and  secular.  That  this  jurisdiction  is  not  only  universal  but  also 
special,  including  all  the  lesser  agencies  as  parts  of  the  greater  ;  just  as 
all  its  parts  are  included  in  the  whole.  That  God  has  given  to  man  in 
the  present  world,  a  two-fold  life,  one  part  spiritual,  and  the  other  part 
secular  ;  and  has  so  blended  them  together  that  the  secular  life,  embrac- 
ing man's  civil,  social,  and  earthly  good,  is  subordinate  to  his  spiritual 
life  and  spiritual  good.  Therefore,  since  God's  law,  and  his  administration 
of  it,  apply  to  man's  spiritual  life,  it  must  also  necessarily  apply  to  man's 
civil,  social,  and  business  life,  as  subordinate  parts  of  his  higher  spirit- 
ual life.  This  spiritual  life,  therefore,  is  the  fundamental,  or  constitu- 
tional, life  of  man  ;  and  God's  law,  as  expressive  of  his  will  regarding 
this  dual  life  of  man,  and  as  found  in  the  ten  commandments,  is  the 
constitutional  law  of  God's  jurisdiction  overman,  and  is  therefore  irre- 
pealable. 

"In  administering  this  one  constitutional  law  to  the  good  of  this  two- 
fold life  of  man,  God  has  ordained  two  administrative  agencies,  one  of 
them  the  Church,  as  the  spiritual  agency  in  the  realm  of  man's  spiritual 
life,  and  the  other  the  State  as  his  secular  agency  in  the  realm  of  man's 
secular  life.  And  although  these  agents  are  two  and  not  one,  and  are 
diverse  in  their  nature,  and  occupy  separate  and  diverse  realms  of  au- 
thority, yet  they  are  both  of  them  subject  to  the  same  law,  and  are 
ordained  for  the  purpose  of  ministering  to  man's  good  through  this  one 
and  same  law.  And  therefore  it  is,  that  civil  government,  of  whatever 
abstract  form  it  be,  as  "an  ordinance  of  God,"  and  the  civil  ruler  as  "a 
minister  of  God,"  are  both  alike  subject  to  the  ten  commandments. 
And  not  only  are  they  subject,  but  are  ministers  of  God  to  man  for  good. 
They  are  also  his  agents  for  applying  these  commandments  to  man's  good 
within  the  realm  of  man's  secular  life,  as  far  as  the  commandments  have 
secular  application.  This  is  admitted  to  be  so  as  far  as  these  command- 
ments apply  to  murder,  adultery,  theft,  and  slander  ;  and  they  also  in 
like  manner  apply  to  the  worship  of  God,  and  the  worship  of  the  Sab- 
bath, as  far  as  these  come  within  the  province  of  the  civil  power.  These 
things  being  so,  neither  the  civil  power  "as  God's  ordinance,"  nor  tJie 
civil  ruler,  "  as  God's  minister,"  within  their  special  province,  have  any 
authority  as  such  to  make  void  any  of  the  ten  commandments,  whether  by 
neglect  in  enforcing  them,  or  by  indifference  to  their  authority  and  claims. 

"  At  this  point,  the  party  of  civil  policy  protests  and  cries  out  that 
this  is  uniting  Church  and  State.  The  Christian  replies  :  It  is  indeed  a 
union,  but  only  so  far  as  tico  separate  jurisdictions,  the  one  spiritual  and 
primary,  and  the  other  secular  and  secondary,  exercise  each  one  its  own 
appropriate  authority  within  its  own  individual  province,  to  secure  a 
two-fold  good  to  the  two-fold  life  of  man.  This  union,  therefore,  is  like 
the  union  of  the  spiritual  in  man,  acting  conjointly  with  the  body  in 


THE  NATIONAL  REFORM  THEOCRACY.  711 

man  ;  the  body  being  brought  under  and  kept  in  subjection  to  the  spiritual. 
It  is  like  the  union  of  the  spiritual  life  in  man  acting  conjointly  with  man's 
domestic  life  ;  all  the  members  of  the  family  being  loved  less  than 
Christ ;  and  all  made  subject  to  his  claims." 

Let  us  analyze  this  :  (a)  Man  is  composed  of  two  parts, 
spiritual  and  secular  ;  (7>)  The  ten  commandments,  as  ex- 
pressive of  the  whole  duty  of  man  to  God,  are  likewise 
composed  of  two  parts  —  the  spiritual  and  the  secular  ;  (<?) 
There  are  two  agencies  employed  for  applying  the  two-fold 
nature  of  this  law  to  the  two-fold  nature  of  man  ;  these  two 
agencies  are  the  Church  and  the  State  ;  (d)  Throughout,  the 
secular  is  subordinate,  and  must  be  held  in  subjection  to  the 
spiritual  ;  (e)  Therefore,  The  State  as  the  secular  and  sub- 
ordinate agency  must  be  "brought  under,"  held  "in  sub- 
jection "  to,  the  Church,  just  as  the  body,  the  secular  part  of 
man,  must  be  brought  under  and  kept  in  subjection  to  the 
mind,  the  spiritual  part  of  man.8 

In  perfect  accord,  therefore,  with  this  logical  deduction 
from  the  two  preceding  extracts,  one  of  the  oldest  district 
secretaries  of  the  National  Reform  Association,  "Rev." 
J.  M.  Foster,  in  the  Christian  Cynosure,  of  October  17, 
1889,  said  :  - 

"  According  to  the  Scriptures,  the  State  and  its  sphere  exist  for  the 
sake  of,  and  to  serve  the  interests  of,  the  Church."  "  The  true  State  will 
have  a  wise  reference  to  the  Church's  interests  in  all  its  legislative,  exec- 
utive, and  judicial  proceedings.  .  .  .  The  expenses  of  the  church,  in 
carrying  on  her  public,  aggressive  work,  it  meets  in  whole  or  in  part  out 
of  the  public  treasury.  Thus  the  Church  is  protected  and  exalted  by  the 
State." 

From  these  declarations  it  is  clear  that  the  National  Re- 
form view  of  the  relationship  between  the  Church  and  the 

8  See  Symmachus,  pages  539-540,  this  book;  and  Pope  Gelasius  I,  A.  n.  492- 
496,'expressed  it  to  the  emperor  Amistasius  thus :  "  There  are  two  powers  who  rule 
the  world,  the  imperial  and  the  pontifical.  You  are  sovereign  of  the  human  race, 
but  you  bow  your  neck  to  those  who  preside  over  things  divine.  The  priesthood 
is  the  greater  of  the  two  powers ;  it  has  to  render  an  account  in  the  last  day  for 
the  acts  of  kings." — Milmari's  "•History  of  Latin  Christianity,"  book  Hi,  chap.  it 
par.  30. 


712  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

State,  is  identical  with  the  old  Cartwright  and  Calvinistic 
one — the  original  papal  view  —  that  the  State  exists  only  as 
subordinate  to  the  church,  to  serve  the  interests  of  the 
church,  and,  if  need  be,  to  lick  the  dust  off  the  feet  of  the 
church. 

Again  :  after  the  manner  of  the  clergy  of  the  fourth 
century,  the  purpose  in  this  is  to  turn  the  government  of 
the  United  States  into  a  kingdom  of  God.  This  is  evident 
from  their  proposed  preamble  to  the  Constitution,  and  the 
other  quotations  given,  but  they  say  it  so  plainly  in  words 
that  the  statements  are  worth  quoting.  Like  the  original 
scheme,  this  also  proceeds  upon  the  theory  of  a  theocracy. 
In  the  Cincinnati  National  Reform  Convention,  January  31 
to  February  1,  1872,  "Rev."  Prof.  J.  R.  W.  Sloane,  D.  V. 
said  : — 

"Every  government,  by  equitable  laws,  is  a  government  of  God  ;  a 
republic  thus  governed  is  of  him,  through  the  people,  and  is  as  truly  and 
really  a  theocracy  as  the  commonwealth  of  Israel.  The  refusal  to  ac- 
knowledge this  fact  is  as  much  a  piece  of  foolish  impiety  as  that  of  the 
man  who  persists  in  refusing  to  acknowledge  tha,t  God  is  the  author  of 
his  existence." 

The  qualifying  phrase,  "  by  equitable  laws,"  confines  this 
statement  to  National  Reform  governments,  because  all 
others,  as  the  United  States  for  instance,  are  not  govern- 
ments by  equitable  laws,  but  are  "-atheistic"  governments. 
The  argument,  therefore,  is  flatly  that  the  National  Reform 
idea  of  earthly  government  is  as  truly  and  really  falsely 
theocratical  as  is  that  of  the  papacy  itself.9 

In  the  National  Reform  convention  of  1873,  held  in  New 
York  City,  February  26,  27,  one  of  the  speakers,  "Rev." 
J.  Hogg,  said  : — 

"The  nation  that  takes  hold  upon  God  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
shall  never  die.  .  .  .  Let  us  acknowledge  God  as  our  Father  and  sov- 
ereign, and  source  of  all  good,  and  his  blessing  will  be  upon  us.  Crime 
and  corruption  will  come  to  an  end,  and  the  benign  reign  of  Jesus,  our 
rightful  Lord,  will  be  established."  [Applause.] 
9  Pages  265,  30T-309,  this  book. 


THE  NEW  KINGDOM  OF  GOD.  713 

In  the  same  convention,  another  speaker,  "Rev."  J. 
P.  Lytle,  likening  the  National  Reform  movement  to  a  train 
of  cars  going  up  a  steep  grade,  said  :  — 

"When  we  reach  the  summit,  .  .  .  the  train  will  move  out  into  the 
mild  yet  glorious  light  of  millennial  days,  and  the  cry  will  be  raised, 
'  The  kingdoms  of  this  world  have  become  the  kingdoms  of  our  Lord, 
and  of  his  Christ.'"  [Applause.] 

In  the  same  convention,  another,  "Rev."  A.  M.  Milli- 
gan,  D.  D.,  said  :  — 

"  Like  Pou,tius  Pilate,  we  have  a  person  on  our  hands,  and  like  him 
we  may  ask,  '  What  shall  I  do  with  Jesus  who  is  called  Christ  ? '  We 
must  either  crucify  or  crown  him  ;  and  like  tlie  Jewish  nation,  our  de- 
cision will  seal  our  future  destiny.  Either  like  them  we  will  reject  him 
and  perish,  or,  becoming  a  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and  his  Christ,  we  shall 
fill  the  earth,  and  endure  forever." 

In  the  annual  convention  of  the  Association  for  1887, 
"Rev."  W.  T.  Me  Connel,  of  Youngstown,  Ohio,  proposed 
the  formation  of — 

"A  praying  league,  to  be  composed  of  all  who  are  interested  in  this 
movement,  to  covenant  together  to  offer  a  prayer  at  the  noon  hour, 
wherever  they  may  be,  every  day  till  our  prayer  is  answered  in  the  abo- 
lition of  the  liquor  traffic,  and  till  this  nation  is  made  God's  kingdom." 

The  proposition  was  heartily  and  unanimously  indorsed 
by  the  convention,  and  Mr.  Me  Connel  was  given  charge  of 
the  concern. 

And  that  no  element  might  be  lacking  to  the  perfect 
likeness  of  the  original  papal  theory,  the  Christian  Nation, 
which  is  second  only  to  the  Christian  Statesman  in  National 
Reform  propensities,  in  an  editorial,  June  15,  1887,  put  the 
finishing -touch  to  the  picture,  in  the  following  words:  — 

"When  the  State  becomes  positively  Christian  in  Constitution,  and 
Christian  men  are  elected  to  make  law,  something  like  this  will  be  done  : 
A  street-car  company's  charter  will  be  granted,  conditioned  upon  the 
running  of  cars  free  on  Sabbath  for  the  accommodation  of  Christian 
people  on  errands  of  worship,  of  necessity,  and  of  mercy,  even  as  bridge 


714  THE   ORE  AT  CONSPIRACY. 

toll  is  at  present  remitted  on  the  Sabbath  in  some  places.  To  this  it  will 
be  objected  that  others  than  Christians  will  ride  for  other  than  Christian 
purposes,  which  is  very  true  ;  but  the  sin  will  be  upon  their  own  souls. 
The  company  will  suffer  no  hardships,  the  men  employed  will  be  God's 
messengers  for  good,  and  'in  that  day  there  shall  be  upon  the  bells  of  the 
horses,  holiness  unto  the  Lord.'"  10 

The  likeness  being  so  close  in  theory,  between  this  and 
the  papacy,  it  were  only  to  be  expected  that  the  likeness 
would  be  just  as  close  in  practice  if  the  National  Reformers 
should  only  secure  the  power  to  put  the  theory  into  practice. 
This  also  is  abundantly  shown  in  the  published  words  and 
speeches  of  the  chief est  representatives  of  the  Association. 
The  National  Reform  Sunday-school  lessons  for  1884,  pub- 
lished in  the  Christian  Statesman,  were  written  by  David 
Gregg,  D.  D.,  then  of  New  York  City,  later  pastor  of  Park 
Street  Church,  Boston,  and  now  (1894),  successor  to  Dr. 
T.  L.  Cuyler  in  his  pastorate  in  Brooklyn.  In  the  lesson 
printed  in  the  Statesman  of  June  5,  Dr!  Gregg  positively 
declared  and  supported  the  declaration  by  argument,  that 
the  civil  power  "has  the  right  to  command  the  consciences  of 
men"  And  in  full  accord  with  this  strictly  papal  principle, 
the  Christian  Statesman  itself,  October  2,  1884,  says :  — 

"  Give  all  men  to  understand  that  this  is  a  Christian  nation,  and  that, 
believing  that  without  Christianity  we  perish,  we  must  maintain  by  all 
means  our  Christian  character.  Inscribe  this  character  on  our  Constitu- 
tion. .  .  .  Enforce  upon  all  who  come  among  us  the  laws  of  Christian 
morality." 

To  enforce  upon  men  the  laws  of  Christian  morality  is  to 
compel  men  \?ho  are  not  Christians  to  act  as  though  they 
were.  It  is  nothing  else  than  an  attempt  to  compel  them  to 
be  Christians,  and  does  in  fact  compel  them  to  be  hypo- 
crites. Yet  when  it  is  said  that  this  is  to  invade  the  rights 
of  conscience,  the  National  Reformers,  in  the  words  of 
"Rev."  TV.  J.  Coleman,  in  the  Christian  Statesman  of 
November  1,  1883,  coolly  reply  :  — 

"  If  there  be  any  Christian  who  objects  to  the  proposed  amendment 
on  the  ground  that  it  might  touch  the  conscience  of  the  infidel,  it  seems 
10  Page  274,  this  book. 


WHAT  THEY  PfiOPOSJS  TO  DO.  715 

to  me  it  would  be  in  order  to  inquire  whether  he  himself  should  not  have 
some  conscience  in  this  matter." 

And  thus  according  to  the  National  Reform  type  of 
"Christianity,"  it  is  the  perfection  of  conscientiousness  to 
outrage  the  consciences  of  others  ;  and  the  reverse  of  the 
Golden  Rule  —  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would  not  that  men 
should  do  to  you.  this  do  ye  even  unto  them  —  is  made  by 
them  and  to  them  the  law  and  the  prophets. 

Accordingly,  in  strict  adherence  to  these  bad  principles, 
the  testimony  proceeds.  In  the  Christian  Statesman  of 
January  13,  1887,  "Rev."  M.  A.  Gault,  a  District  Secretary 
and  a  leading  worker  of  the  Association,  declared  :  — 

"  Our  remedy  for  all  these  malefic  influences,  is  to  have  the  govern- 
ment simply  set  up  the  moral  law  and  recognize  God's  authority  behind 
it,  and  lay  its  hand  on  any  religion  that  does  not  conform  to  it." 

And  "Rev."  E.  B.  Graham,  a  vice-president '  of  the 
Association,  in  an  address  delivered  at  York,  Neb.,  and 
reported  in  the  Christian  Statesman  of  May  21,  1885, 
said  :  — 

"We  might  add  in  all  justice,  If  the  opponents  of  the  Bible  do  not 
like  our  government  and  its  Christian  features,  let  them  go  to  some 
wild,  desolate  land,  and  in  the  name  of  the  devil,  and  for  the  sake  of 
the  devil,  subdue  it,  and  set  up  a  government  of  their  own  on  infidel  and 
atheistic  ideas  ;  and  then  if  they  can  stand  it,  stay  there  till  they  die."11 

Yet  more  than  this  :  In  the  National  Reform  convention 
for  1873,  held  in  New  York  City,  Jonathan  Edwards,  D.  D., 
a  vice-president  and  a  leading  spirit  of  the  Association,  made 
a  speech  in  which  he  said  :  — 

"  We  want  State  and  religion,  and  we  are  going  to  have  it.  It  shall 
be  that  so  far  as  the  affairs  of  State  require  religion,  it  shall  be  revealed 
religion  —the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  Christian  oath  and  Christian 
morality  shall  have  in  this  laud  '  an  undeniable  legal  basis.'  We  use  the 
word  '  religion '  in  its  proper  sense,  as  meaning  a  man's  personal  relation 
of  faith  and  obedience  to  God." 

Then    according  to  their    own    definition,    the   National 
Reform  Association   intends   that   the    State    shall   obtrude 
11  See  page  601  of  this  book. 


716  THE  GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

itself  into  every  man's  personal  relation  of  faith  and  obedi- 
ence to  God. 

The  National  Reform  Association  is  strong  not  only  in 
the  influence  which  in  itself  it  possesses,  but  it  is  still 
stronger  in  the  alliances  which  it  has  been  enabled  to  effect. 
The  first  of  these  was  formed  in  1S8T,  with  — 

THE  WOMAN'S  CHRISTIAN  TEMPERANCE  UNION. 

And  since  that  time,  all  the  principal  officers  of  the 
Union  —  Miss  Willard,  Mrs.  Bateham,  and  Mrs.  Woodbridge 
of  the  National  Union,  and  several  presidents  of  State 
Unions — have  been  also  vice-presidents  of  the  National 
Reform  Association. 

In  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  monthly  reading  for  September,  1886, 
regarding  which  the  secretary  of  the  National  Reform  As- 
sociation "had  correspondence  with  Miss  Willard  before  it 
appeared,"  one  of  the  responses  is  as  follows  :  — 

"A  true  theocracy  is  yet  to  come,  .  .  .  and  humanity's  weal  depends 
upon  the  enthronement  of  Christ  in  law  and  law-makers  :  hence  I  pray 
devoutly,  as  a  Christian  patriot,  for  the  ballot  in  the  hands  of  women, 
and  rejoice  that  the  National  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  has 
so  long  championed  this  cause." 

Nor  is  it  simply  as  an  ally  as  such,  of  the  National  Re- 
form Association,  that  the  Union  works  for  these  bad  prin- 
ciples. In  its  own  separate  and  organized  capacity,  the 
Union  advocates  the  whole  National  Reform  scheme.  At 
the  annual  convention  of  the  National  Union  for  1887,  held 
in  Nashville,  the  president,  Miss  Frances  E.  Willard,  in  her 
annual  address,  officially  reported  in  the  Union  Signal  of 
December  1,  declared  the  purpose  of  the  Union,  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"  The  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  local,  State,  national, 
and  world-wide,  has  one  vital,  organic  thought,  one  all-absorbing  pur- 
pose, one  undying  enthusiasm,  and  that  is  that  Christ  shall  be  this  world's 
kiny ;  —  yea,  verily,  THIS  WORLD'S  KING  in  its  realm  of  cause  and  effect, 
—  king  of  its  courts,  its  camps,  its  commerce, —  king  of  its  colleges  and 
cloisters, —  king  of  its  customs  and  its  Constitutions.  .  .  .  The  kingdom 
of  Christ  must  enter  the  realm  of  law  through  the  gateway  of  politics. 


AN  OFFICIAL  ANNOUNCEMENT.  f!7 

.  .  .  We  pray  Heaven  to  give  them  [the  old  parties]  no  rest  .  .  .  until 
they  shall  .  .  .  swear  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  Christ  in  politics,  and 
march  in  one  great  army  up  to  the  polls  to  worship  God.  . 

"  I  firmly  believe  that  the  patient,  steadfast  work  of  Christian  women 
will  so  react  upon  politics  within  the  next  generation,  that  the  party  of  God 
will  beat  the  fore ;  ministers  will  preach  for  it  from  their  pulpits,  and 
Christian  men  will  be  as  much  ashamed  to  say  that  they  never  go  to  the 
caucus  as  they  would  be  now  to  use  profane  language  or  defame  charac- 
ter ;  for  there  is  just  one  question  that  every  Christian  ought  to  ask  : 
'What  is  the  relation  of  this  party,  this  platform,  this  candidate,  to  the  set- 
ting iip  of  Christ's  kingdom  on  the  earth  ?  How  does  my  vote  relate  to  the 
Lord's  Prayer  ? ' 

"  The  answer  to  this  question  is  sacred,  not  secular,  worthy  to  be  given 
from  the  pulpit  on  the  Sabbath  day.  In  the  Revolutionary  War  the  question 
at  issue  being  religious  liberty,  our  forefathers  felt  that  they  could  preach 
and  pray  about  it  on  the  Sabbath.  In  the  Civil  War,  both  sides  believing 
their  cause  to  be  holy,  could  do  the  same  ;  and  now,  when  it  is  a  question 
of  preserving  tlie  Sabbath  itself  and  guarding  the  homes  which  are  the 
sanctuaries  of  Christ's  gospel,  we  women  believe  that  no  day  is  too  good,  no 
place  too  consecrated,  for  the  declaration  of  principles  and  the  determining  of 
votes.  The  ascetic  in  the  olden  time  shut  himself  away  from  the  world 
and  counted  everything  secular  except  specific  acts  of  devotion.  The 
Christian  soldier  of  to-day  reverses  this  process,  and  makes  everything  he 
does  a  devotional  act,  an  expression  of  his  loyalty  to  Christ  —  so  finding 
his  balance  in  God,  that  no  sin  can  overcome,  and  no  sorrow  surprise 
him.  Prayer  is  the  pulse  of  his  life  ;  there  is  no  secular,  no  sacred;  all  is 
in  God;  and  as  the  followers  of  Bruce  inclosed  that  hero's  heart  in  a 
silver  shrine  and  flung  it  into  the  ranks  of  the  enemy  that  they  might  fly 
to  win  it  back,  shouting,  'Heart  of  Bruce,  I  follow  thee,'  so  Christian 
men  to-day  take  their  ideal  of  Christ  in  government,  hurl  it  into  the  ranks 
of  his  foes,  and  hasten  on  to  regain  it,  by  rallying  for  the  overthrow  of 
saloon  politics  and  the  triumph  of  the  Christian  at  the  polls. 

"  Our  prayers  are  prophets,  and  predict  this  day  of  glad  deliverance 
as  being  at  the  door.  The  man  who,  in  presence  of  such  possibilities, 
says,  'I  do  n't  want  to  throw  away  my  vote/  is  quite  likely  to  throw 
away  something  even  more  valuable  —  and  that  is  the  voter  himself. 
-For,  as  Miss  West  has  said,  '  To-day  Christ  sits  over  against  the  ballot-boy, 
as  of  old  lie  sat  over  against  the  treasury,  and  judges  men  by  what  they  cast 
tJierein. ' " 

The  official  report  cordially  announces  that  by  an  "al- 
most unanimous  vote "  of  the  whole  delegation  assembled, 
this  address  "was  accepted  as  expressing  the  principles  of 
tho  National  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,"  and 


718  THE  GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

"the  audience  manifested  its  appreciation  of  this  grand 
address  by  universal  hand-clapping  and  waving  of  handker- 
chiefs." 

Although  Christ  himself  has  plainly  declared  that  his 
kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,,  these  "devout  and  honorable 
women  "  (Acts  xiii,  50),  like  those  people  of  old,  seem  de- 
termined to  take  him  by  force  and  make  him  king.  JSTo  one 
should  be  surprised,  therefore,  that  he  should  do  now  as  he 
did  then — he  "departed"  from  them.  It  is  well  to  remem- 
ber also  that  although  "  the  ascetic  in  the  olden  time  shut 
himself  away  from  the  world,"  he  was  always  ready,  upon 
any  question  of  orthodoxy,  to  return  to  the  world,  and  pour 
out  upon  it  all  the  pent-up  passions  of  years.  Many  a  time 
did  these  also  march  in  great  armies  up  to  the  polls,  not  to 
worship  God,  but  to  "blaspheme  his  name,  and  his  taber- 
nacle and  them  which  dwell  in  heaven,"  and  to  outrage 
every  principle  not  only  of  Christianity,  but  of  humanity.13 

In  a  convention  of  the  eighth  district  of  the  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union  of  Wisconsin,  held  at  Augusta, 
October  2— i,  1888,  and  representing  fifteen  counties,  there 
was  passed  "without  a  dissenting  voice"  the  following 
preamble  and  resolution  :  — 

"  Whereas,  God  would  have  all  men  honor  the  Son,  even  as  they 
honor  the  Father  ;  and, — 

"  Whereas,  The  civil  law  which  Christ  gave  from  Sinai  is  the  only 
perfect  law,  and  the  only  law  that  will  secure  the  rights  of  all  classes ; 
therefore, — 

"  Resolved,  That  civil  government  should  recognize  Christ  as  the 
moral  Governor,  and  his  law  as  the  standard  of  legislation." 

And  the  national  convention  of  the  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  for  the  same  year,  held  in  the  Metropoli- 
tan Opera  House,  New  York  City,  the  nineteenth  to  the 
twenty-third  of  the  same  month,  confirmed  this  action  and 
the  principle  of  it,  by  passing  the  following  resolution,  the 
first  in  the  series  of  resolutions  there  adopted,  as  officially 
reported  in  the  Union  Signal  of  November  8  :  — 

13  Pages  412,  415,  424,  425,  429,  432,  444,  490,  510,  545-547,  this  book. 


SPEE'JH  OF  MRS.    WOODJ1RIDGE.  719 

"Resolved,  That  Christ  and  his  gospel,  as  universal  king  and  code, 
should  be  sovereign  in  our  government  and  political  affairs."  u 

At  the  Chautauqua  (N.  Y.)  Assembly  of  1886,  Mrs. 
Woodbridge  of  the  Union  made  a  speech  (July  23),  in  which 
she  said  :  — 

"An  amendment  to  the  national  constitution  requires  the  indorse- 
ment of  two  thirds  of  the  States  to  become  law.  Although  the  action 
must  be  taken  by  State  legislative  bodies,  let  such  an  amendment  be 
submitted,  and  it  would  become  the  paramount  issue  at  the  election  of 
legislators,  and  thus  God  would  be  in  the  thought,  and  his  name  upon 
the  lip,  of  every  man.  May  not  this  be  the  way  opened  to  i;s  ?  How  to 
bring  the  gospel  of  Christ  to  the  masses  has  been,  and  is,  the  vexing 
problem  of  the  church.  Would  not  the  problem  be  solved  ?  Yea, 
Christ  would  then  be  lifted  up,  even  as  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness, 
and  would  we  not  liave  right  to  claim  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise,  that 
'He  will  draw  all  men  unto  himself  ?  .  .  . 

"  In  considering  the  submission  of  such  an  amendment,  we  may  use 
the  very  argument  used  by  Moses,  in  his  song  containing  these  words  of 
Jehovah,  Tor  it  is  not  a  vain  thing  for  you  ;  because  it  is  your  life  : 
and  through  this  thing  ye  shall  prolong  your  days  in  the  land.'  How 
prayerfuluess  would  be  stimulated  !  Conscience  would  press  the  words, 
'If  the  Lord  be  God,  follow  him  ;  but  if  Baal,  then  follow  him  ! '  Then 
would  there  be  searchings  of  heart,  as  David's,  of  which  we  learn  in  the 
fifty-first  Psalm.  Prayer  would  bring  faith  and  the  power  of  the  Spirit ; 
and  when  such  power  shall  rest  upon  the  children  of  God,  there  icill'be 
added  to  the  church  daily  such  as  shall  be  saved. 

"The  National  Reform  Association  makes  this  plea  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  and  his  suffering  ones.  It  asks  the  prayerful  consideration  of 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  by  which,  if 
adopted,  we,  the  people,  will  crown  Christ  the  Lord,  as  our  rightful 
Sovereign. 

"The  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  pursuing  its  work  'For 
God,  and  home,  and  native  land,'  in  thirty-nine  departments  of  reform, 
can  but  see  that  were  a  nation  to  be  thus  aroused,  were  it  to  make  such 
an  acknowledgment  at  the  ballot-box,  the  laws  of  our  land  would  ere 
long  be  truly  'founded  on  the  old  Mosaic  ritual.'  Then  we  could  [Italics 
hers]  have  no  other  God.  Unto  the  Lord  Jehovah  would  we  bow. 
Should  we  take  his  name  in  vain,  or  fail  to  keep  the  Sabbath  holy,  we 
would  be  criminals." 

Is  there  any  one  so  dull  as  to  be  unable  to  see  that  in  this 
scheme  there  lies  the  whole  theory  and  practice  of  the  papacy  ? 

14  Page  489,  this  book. 


720  THE  ORE  AT  CONSPIRACY. 

In  this  way  precisely  the  "gospel"  "was  brought  to  the 
masses  "  in  the  fourth  century.15  In  this  way  precisely,  then, 
God  and  his  name  were  put  into  the  thought  and  upon  the 
lip,  clubs  and  stones  into  the  hands,  and  murder  in  the  heart,  of 
every  man  ;  and  so  there  was,  then,  added  to  the  church  daily 
such  as  should  be  -  — .  And,  by  the  way,  the  wromen 
were  among  the  leaders  and  were  the  main  help  in  bringing 
about  that  grand  triumph  of  the  "gospel"  among  the 
masses.  And  " history  repeats  itself,"  even  to  the  part  the 
women  would  play  in  the  political  project  of  bringing  "the 
gospel  to  the  masses."1" 

To  propose  a  political  campaign  managed  by  ambitious 
clerics,  political  hypocrites,  ward  politicians,  and  city  bosses, 
and  call  that  the  bringing  of  the  gospel  of  Christ  to  the 
masses,  and  the  means  of  adding  to  the  church  daily  such  as 
shall  be  saved,  is  certainly  a  conception  of  the  gospel  that 
is  degraded  enough  in  all  conscience.  But  when,  to  cap  such 
conception,  it  is  avowed  that  such  would  be  the  lifting  up  of 
Christ  even  as  the  serpent  was  lifted  up  in  the  wilderness, 
and  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  that  he  will  draw  all 
men  unto  him,  the  whole  idea  becomes  one  that  is  vastly 
nearer  to  open  blasphemy  than  it  is  to  any  proper  concep- 
tion of  what  the  gospel  of  Christ  is.  Yet  such,  and  of  such, 
is  the  gospel  of  the  National  Reform  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  combination.  Instead  of  lifting  up 
Christ,  it  tramples  him  under  foot.  Instead  of  treasuring 
the  gospel  as  the  pearl  of  great  price,  it  casts  it  to  swine  to 
be  trampled  under  their  feet.  Instead  of  honoring  Christ,  it 
puts  him  to  an  open  shame.  Instead  of  the  gospel  being 
held  forth  as  the  mystery  of  godliness,  it  is  supplanted  by 
the  mystery  of  iniquity.  For  the  testimony  of  history  is 
unanimous  in  confirmation  of  the  truth  that  "  men  will  fight 
to  the  death,  and  persecute  without  pity,  for  a  creed  whose 
doctrines  they  do  not  understand  and  whose  precepts  they 
habitually  disobey." 

15  Pages  293,  299,  this  book. 

16  Pages  374,  375,  419,  423,  501,  503,  of  this  book. 


PROHIBITION  JOINS  THE  PROCESSION.  721 

The  next  ally  that  the  National  Reform  Association  was 
enabled  to  gain  was  and  is  — 

THE    THIKD-PAKTY    PROHIBITION    PARTY. 

In  1887  several  State  conventions  took  the  same  ground 
as  the  Association  ;  and  in  1888  the  National  Prohibition 
convention,  held  at  Indianapolis,  said  :  - 

"The  Prohibition  party  in  national  convention  assembled,  acknowl- 
edging Almighty  God  as  the  source  of  all  power  in  government,  do 
hereby  declare,"  etc. 

"Sam"  Small  was  secretary  of  this  convention,  and  his 
views  in  this  connection  were  declared  in  a  "  revival  ser- 
mon "  delivered  in  Kansas  City,  in  the  January  preceding, 
and  repeated  by  him  in  a  letter  to  the  Voice  of  August  8, 
1889,  as  follows  :  - 

"  I  want  to  see  the  day  come  in  the  history  of  our  country  when  the 
voice  of  the  church  of  Christ  will  be  heard  and  respected  upon  all  vital 
moral  issues.  I  shall  ever  hope  for  and  patiently  expect  the  day  when 
legislation,  State,  national,  and  municipal,  will  be  projected  in  harmony 
with  the  eternal  principle  of  justice  and  righteousness,  revealed  by  Christ 
and  proclaimed  by  his  church.  Happy  will  be  the  day  .  .  .  when  tJie  har- 
monious judgment  of  the  people  of  God  in  America  upon  the  issues  of  tem- 
perance, purity,  and  uprightness,  shall  be  received  with  respect  and  enacted 
into  laws." 

What  more  was  the  papacy  ever  than  this  ?  What  more 
did  it  ever  claim  to  be  ?  All  that  the  papacy  ever  wanted 
was  that  legislation,  State,  national,  and  municipal,  should 
be  projected  in  harmony  with  the  principles  of  justice  and 
righteousness  as  proclaimed  by  the  church;  and  that  "the 
harmonious  judgment  of  the  people  of  God"  (and  to  find  out 
what  this  "harmonious  judgment"  was,  is  what  all  the 
councils  were  for),  should  be  respected  "and  enacted  into 
laws."  That  is  all  she  ever  wanted,  and  that  is  all  she 
wants  now,  as  is  seen  by  the  words  of  Pope  Leo  XIII,  on 
page  730  of  this  book.  And  as  though  to  make  perfectly 


722  THE  GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

clear  the  attitude  of  the  National  Prohibition  party,  Mr.  Small 
in  the  same  letter  continues  as  follows  :  — 

"I  hold  that  the  above  expressions  are  in  perfect  harmony  with  the 
principles  of  the  National  Prohibition  party,  as  expressed  in  its  preamble 
and  platform.'' 

And  Tlie  Voice  endorsed  the  letter  throughout. 

These  evidences  are  sufficient  to  show  that  with  the  leader- 
ship of  the  Third-party  Prohibition  party,  the  principle  of 
prohibition  is  entirely  subordinate  to  the  scheme  for  securing 
religious  legislation,  and  to  the  setting  up  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical power  above  the  civil  ;  and  that  the  alliance  with  the 
National  Reform  Association  is  not  an  accident. 

A  third  ally  of  the  National  Reform  Association  is  — 

THE  AMERICAN  SABBATH  UNION 

which  was  organized  in  New  York  City,  November  13,  1888. 
The  way  in  which  it  was  brought  about  is  this  :  The  year 
1888  was  the  time  for  the  regular  meeting  of  the  General 
Conference  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  Early  in 
the  year,  before  the  Conference  met,  "Rev."  W.  F.  Crafts 
circulated  among  the  officers  of  Sunday-law  associations  in 
all  parts  of  the  country  the  following  petition  :  — 

'  Te  the  General  Conference  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

"  DEAR  FATHERS  AND  BRETHREN  :  The  undersigned  earnestly  petition 
you  as  representatives  of  the  largest  denomination  of  American  Chris- 
tians, to  take  the  initiative  in  forming  a  National  Sabbath  Committee, 
by  appointing  several  persons  to  serve  in  your  behalf  on  such  a  commit- 
tee, with  instructions  to  ask  other  religious  bodies,  in  your  name,  to 
appoint  representatives  to  serve  on  the  same  committee,  in  order  that  the 
invasion  of  our  day  of  rest  and  worship  by  the  united  forces  of  the  liquor 
traffic  and  its  allies,  may  be  successfully  resisted  by  the  united  forces  of 
American  Christianity,  in  the  interests  alike  of  the  church  and  of  the 
nation,  of  morality  and  of  liberty." 

When  the  said  General  Conference  met,  the  petition  was 
presented  by  "Rev."  J.  H.  Knowles,  editor  of  the  Pearl  of 
Days.  The  petition  was  referred  to  the  "  Committee  on  the 


ANOTHER   STRONG  ALLY.  723 

State  of  the  Church."     May  15   this  committee  made  the 
following  report,  which  was  u  unanimously  adopted  :  " 

"In  view  of  the  important  interests  involved  in  the  above  memorial, 
your  committee  recommend  the  following  for  adoption  by  the  General 
Conference  :  — 

"Resolved,  1.  That  the  General  Conference  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal Church,  in  response  to  a  petition  signed  by  the  officers  of  Sabbath 
associations  of  this  country,  and  by  more  than  six  hundred  other  peti- 
tioners of  different  evangelical  denominations,  take  the  initiative  in 
forming  a  National  Sabbath  Committee. 

"2.  That  this  General  Conference  invite  all  other  evangelical  de- 
nominations to  appoint  representatives  to  serve  on  this  Committee. 

"3.  That  the  basis  of  representation  on  the  Committee  for  each  de- 
nomination be  one  representative  for  each  one  hundred  thousand  or  ma- 
jor fraction  thereof. 

"4.  That  the  following  persons  be  designated  to  serve  on  this  Com- 
mittee during  the  coming  quadrennium,  with  power  to  complete  the  full 
quota  for  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  and  to  fill  vacancies —  the 
first-named  to  communicate  the  action  of  this  body  to  the  official  rep- 
resentatives of  other  denominations,  and  to  be  the  convener  of  the  Com- 
mittee for  its  first  meeting." 

This  prompt  and  hearty  action  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal General  Conference,  was  made  the  basis  of  a  plea  for 
similar  action  on  the  part  of  other  church  organizations  which 
met  the  same  year.  Upon  the  strength  of  this  action,  the 
originator  of  the  petition  visited  and  secured  the  indorse- 
ment of  the  Presbyterian  General  Assemblies  both  North 
and  South  ;  the  Baptist  Home  Missionary  convention  ;  the 
Synod  of  the  Reformed  Church  ;  and  the  General  Assembly  of 
the  United  Presbyterian  Church.  Then,  November  13,  there 
was  held  in  the  parlors  of  Col.  Elliott  F.  Shepard,  New 
York  City,  a  meeting  of  eight  preachers,  one  Ph.D.,  and 
Mr.  Shepard,  and  the  organization  was  effected,  with  a  Con- 
stitution as  to  name,  basis,  and  object  as  follows  :  — 

"I. —  NAME. 

"The  American  Sabbath  Union. 
"  u.  —  BASIS. 

"The  basis  of  this  Union  is  the  divine  authority  and  universal  and 
perpetual  obligation  of  the  Sabbath,  as  manifested  in  the  order  and  cou- 
54 


724  THE   GREAT   CONSPIRACY. 

stitution  of  nature,  declared  in  the  revealed  will  of  God,  formulated  in 
the  fourth  commandment  of  the  moral  law,  interpreted  and  applied  by 
our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  transferred  to  the  Christian  Sabbath, 
or  Lord's  day,  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  approved  by  its  beneficial 
influence  upon  national  life. 

' '  in.  —  OBJECT. 

"The  object  of  this  Union  is  to  preserve  the  Christian  Sabbath  as  a 
day  of  rest  and  worship." 

Col.  Shepard  was  made  president;16  "Rev."  J.  H. 
Knowles  was  made  general  secretary  and  editor*  of  publi- 
cations, and  of  the  Pearl  of  Days,  which  was  made -the 
official  organ  of  the  Association  ;  the  whole  United  States 
was  divided  into  ten  "Districts,"  and  "Rev."  W.  F. 
Crafts  was  made  field  secretary,  for  organizing  the  work 
in  the  said  districts,  and  for  carrying  on  the  work  at  large. 
When  this  organization  was  just  one  month  old,  there  was 
held  at  Washington,  D.  C. ,  a  convention  composed  of 
themselves,  National  Reformers,  and  Woman's  Christian 
Temperance  Union  managers,  for  the  puipose  of  urging 
upon  Congress,  by  every  means  they  could  employ,  re- 
ligious legislation,  which  if  secured,  would  commit  the 
nation  to  the  whole  National  Reform  scheme. 

We  have  seen  that  the  first  definite  step  toward  the 
organization  of  the  American  Sabbath  Union,  was  in  pre- 
senting to  the  Methodist  Episcopal  General  Conference  a 
numerously  signed  petition  from  Sunday-law  associations 
already  existing..  The  chief  of  these  was  the  Illinois  Asso- 
ciation, which  dates  its  active  existence  as  an  organization 
from  a  convention  held  in  the  city  of  Elgin,  November  8, 
188T.17  Statements  and  arguments  made  by  representative 
men  in  this  convention,  therefore,  will  justly  show  the  in' 
tent  of  the  Union  which  not  only  in  a  great  measure  grew 
out  of  it,  but  of  which  it  afterward  became  an  important 
part.  "Rev."  C.  E.  Mandeville,  D.  D.,  of  Chicago,  made 

16  He  held  the  office  till  his  death  in  1893. 

17  Christian  Cynosure,  November  17,  24,  1887. 


WHEN  THE   CHURCH  AWAKES.  725 

one  of  the  main  speeches  of  the  convention.  He  afterward 
became  president  of  the  State  Association,  and  a  vice-presi- 
dent of  the  American  Sabbath  Union,  the  latter  of  which  he 
is  still.  In  his  Elgin  speech,  Dr.  Mandeville  spoke  on  the 
subject  of  "Some  Dangers  Respecting  Sabbath  Observ- 
ance," in  the  course  of  which  he 'said  :  — 

"The  subject  has  two  sides.  We  must  not  look  alone  at  the  relig- 
ious side.  The  interests  of  the  Church  and  State  are  united.  They 
must  staud  or  fall  together." 

And  jet  they  all  make  a  great  show  cf.  injured  innocence 
•when  any  person  opposes  the  movement  on  the  ground  that 
it  would  create  a  union  of  Church  and  State.  In  the  same 
speech,  Dr.  Mandeville  further  said  :  - 

"The  merchants  of  Tyre  insisted  upon  selling  goods  near  the  temple 
on  the  Sabbath,  and  Nehemiah  compelled  the  officers  of  the  law  to  do 
their  duty,  and  stop  it.  So  we  can  compel  the  officers  of  the  law  to  do 
their  duty.  .  .  .  When  the  Church  of  God  awakes  and  does  its  duty  on 
one  side,  and  the  State  on  the  other,  we  shall  have  no  further  trouble  in 
this  matter." 

Yes  ;  we  all  know  how  it  was  before.  The  gentle  Albi- 
genses  in  the  South  of  France  greatly  disturbed  the  Church 
—  they  refused  to  obey  her  commands.  But  the  Church  was 
wide  awake,  for  Innocent  III  was  pope  ;  and  with  the  com- 
mand, "Up  !  most  Christian  king  ;  up  !  and  aid  us  in  our 
work  of  vengeance,"  he  saw  to  it  that  the  State  was  awake 
on  the  other  side.  Then  with  the  Church  awake  to  its 
"duty"  on  one  side,  and  the  State  on  the  other,  the  Albi- 
genses  were  blotted  from  the  earth,  and  there  was  no  further 
trouble  in  that  matter. 

It  is  worth  while  further  to  notice  this  statement  upon 
the  merit  of  its  argument,  because  it  was  not  only  used  there 
by  Dr.  Mandeville,  but  it  is  used  everywhere  by  the  whole 
National  Reform  alliance.  It  is  their  stock  argument  and 
example. 


726  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY. 

Nehemiah  was  ruling  there  in  a  true  theocracy,  a  gov- 
ernment of  God  ;  the  law  of  God  was  the  law  of  the  land, 
and  God's  will  was  made  known  by  the  written  word,  and 
by  prophets.  Therefore  if  Dr.  Mandeville's  argument  is  of 
any  force  at  all,  it  is  so  only  upon  the  claim  that  the  gov- 
ernment here  should  be  a  "theocracy.  With  this  idea  the 
view  of  Mr.  Crafts  agrees  precisely,  and  he  was  not  only  field 
secretary,  but  the  originator  of  the  National  Sunday-law 
Union.  He  claims,  as  expressed  in  his  own  words,  in  the 
Christian  Statesman  of  July  5,  1888,  that  "  the  preachers 
are  the  successors  of  the  prophets.''1 

Now  put  these  things  together.  The  government  of 
Israel  was  a  theocracy  ;  the  will  of  God  was  made  known  to 
the  ruler  by  prophets  ;  the  ruler  compelled  the  officers  of 
the  law  to  prevent  the  ungodly  from  selling  goods  on  the 
Sabbath.  By  this  religious  combination,  the  government  of 
the  United  States  is  to  be  made  a  theocracy  ;  the  preachers 
are  the  successors  of  the  prophets  ;  and  they  are  to  compel 
the  officers  of  the  law  to  prevent  all  selling  of  goods  and  all 
manner  of  work  on  Sunday.  This  shows  conclusively  that 
these  preachers  intend  to  take  the  supremacy  into  their 
hands,  officially  declare  the  will  of  God,  and  compel  all 
men  to  conform  to  it.  And  this  deduction  is  made  certain 
by  the  words  of  Prof.  Blanchard,  in  the  Elgin  conven- 
tion :  — 

"In  this  work  we  are  undertaking  for  the  Sabbath,  we  are  the 
representatives  of  God." 

The  example  of  Nehemiah  never  can  be.  cited  as  a  prece- 
dent on  any  subject  under  any  form  of  government  but  a 
theocracy,  and  when  it  is  cited  as  an  example  in  any  instance 
in  the  United  States,  it  can  be  so  only  upon  the  theory  that 
the  government  of  the  cities  or  States  of  the  Union  and  the 
Union  itself,  should  be  a  theocracy.  A  theocracy  is  essen- 
tially a  religious  government.  Sabbath  laws  belong  only 
with  a  theocracy.  Sunday  laws  being  advocated  upon  the 


THEY  DESPISE    THK  DECLARATION.  727 

theory  that  Sunday  is  substituted  for  the  Sabbath,  likewise 
are  inseparable  from  a  theocratical  theory  of  government. 
In  such  a  theory  Sunday  laws  originated,18  with  such  a 
theory  they  belong,  and  every  argument  in  behalf  of  Sun- 
day laws,  is  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  compelled  to  presup- 
pose a  theocratical  form  of  government. 

Such  is  the  National  Reform  combination  and  its  princi- 
ples, as  it  stands,  in  itself  considered.  And  from  all  this 
it  is  evident  that  the  whole  scheme  and  organization  forms 
only  a  colossal  religious  combination  to  effect  political  pur- 
poses, the  chief  purpose  being  to  change  the  form  of  the 
United  States  government  and  turn  it  into  a  new  "kingdom 
of  God,"  a  new  theocracy,  in  which  the  civil  power  shall 
be  but  the  tool  of  the  religious,  in  which  the  govern- 
ment shall  no  longer  derive  just  powers  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed,  but  shall  be  absorbed  in  the  unjust  and  op- 
pressive power  of  a  despotic  hierarchy,  acting  as  "the 
representative  of  God,"  asserting  and  executing  its  arbitrary 
and  irresponsible  will  as  the  expression  of  the  law  and  will 
of  God. 

Nor  do  they  shrink  from  distinctly  asserting  even  this. 
In  a  joint  convention  ofthe  whole  National  Reform  com- 
bination held  at  Sedalia,  Mo.,  May  23,  24,  1889,  the 
"  Rev."  W.  D.  Gray,  who  was  secretary  of  the  convention 
arid  was  elected  corresponding  secretary  of  the  American 
Sabbath  Union  for  the  Omaha  District,  made  a  speech  as 
follows  :  — 

"I,  for  one,  have  made  this  question  very  ranch  of  a  study,  especially 
this  topic  of  it.  To  appeal  to  divine  authority  in  our  legislation  would 
be  to  fundamentally  change  the  law  of  our  laud,  or  the  principle 
adopted  by  our  fathers  when  they  said  that  all  governments  derive  their 
just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.  I  for  one  do  not  believe 
that  as  a  political  maxim.  I  do  not  believe  that  governments  derive 
their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.  And  I  believe 
as  Brother  Gault  on  this,  I  think.  And  so  the  object  of  this  movement  is  an 
effort  to  change  that  feature  in  our  fundamental  law.  Jefferson  was  under 

18  See  pages  265-267,  274,  309,  314,  315. 


728  THE   GREAT   CONSPIRACY. 

the  influence  of  French  ideas  when  the  Constitution  was  framed,  and 
that  had  something  to  do  with  leaving  God  out  of  the  Constitution.19 
And  I  think  that  the  provincial  history  of  this  country  will  compel  us  to 
come  back  t:>  that,  and  recognize  God  in  our  Constitution.  And  I  see  in 
this  reform  a  providence  teaching  us  the  necessity  of  recognizing  some- 
thing else  besides  the  will  of  the  people  as  the  basis  of  government." 

And  at  the  Chautauqua  (N.  Y.)  Assembly  in  August  fol- 
lowing, Col.  Elliot  F.  Shepard,  speaking  as  president  of  the 
American  Sabbath  Union,  said  :  — 

"Governments  do  not  derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed.  God  is  the  only  law-giver.  His  laws  are  made  clear  and 
plain  in  his  word,  so  that  all  nations  may  know  what  are  the  laws  which 
God  ordained  to  be  kept." 

Having  so  clearly  shown  both  in  their  principles  and  in 
their  own  plain  words,  that  their  purpose  is  entirely  to  sub- 
vert the  principles  of  the  government  of  the  United  States 
and  undo  the  nation  ;  it  is  evident  that  there  was  but  one 
more  step  that  could  be  taken  in  the  apostasy,  and  that  was 
to  secure  AN  ALLIANCE  WITH  THE  PAPACY  ITSELF.  And  even 
this  has  been  done. 


19  The  gentleman  cannot  have  made  this  so  very  much  of  a  study  after  all, 
or  he  would  have  known  that  Jefferson  was  not  in  this  country  at  that  time,  and 
had  nothing  to  do  with  the  framing  of  the  Constitution.  Yet  even  though  he 
had,  it  would  only  have  been  to  his  everlasting  honor,  and  would  have  been  no 
reflection  on  that  document. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


THE  GREAT  CONSPIRACY.—  CONCLUDED. 

THE  fourth  and  in  every  sense  of  the  word  the  most  im- 
portant ally  that  the  National  Reform  combination  was  en- 
abled to  secure  was  and  is  THE  PAPACY. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  National  Reform  principles  are 
papal  principles  from  beginning  to  end,  and  it  was  only  the 
logic  of  the  situation  that  a  positive  union  should  finally  be 
formed  with  the  papacy.  All  that  was  necessary  was  to 
find  something  upon  which  the  two  parties  could  meet  and 
firmly  stand  together,  and  then  have  the  National  Reform 
combination  obtain  a  standing  at  which  it  would  be  to  the 
interests  of  the  papacy  to  recognize  it. 

Consistently  enough,  this  basis  of  agreement,  this  bond 
of  union  in  fact,  was  found  in  the  chief  institution  of  the 
papacy  —  the  Sunday,  and  in  the  demand  for  the  national 
recognition  of  the  "  Christian  "  religion  in  the  enactment 
and  enforcement  of  a  national  law  requiring  the  recognition 
and  observance  of  this  sign  of  papal  authority. 

As  early  as  1881,  the  National  Reformers  struck  this 
note.  In  that  year,  August  31,  one  of  its  leading  repre- 
sentatives published  in  the  Christian  Statesman  the  follow- 
ing pleading  bid  for  the  papal  favor  :  — 

"This  common  interest  ['of  all  religious  people  in  the  Sabbath'— 
Sunday]  ought  both  to  strengthen  our  determination  to  work,  and  our 
readiness  to  co-operate  in  every  way  with  our  Roman  Catholic  fellow- 
citizens.  We  may  be  subjected  to  some  rebuffs  in  our  first  proffers,  and 
the  time  has  not  yet  come  when  the  Roman  Church  will  consent  to  strike 
hands  with  other  churches  —  as  such  ;  but  the  time  has  come  to  make 

[729] 


730  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.-  CONCLUDED. 

repeated  advances,  and  gladly  to  accept  co-operation  in  any  form  in 
which  they  may  be  willing  to  exhibit  it.  It  is  one  of  the  necessities  of  the 
situation." 

In  1881,  however,  the  National  Reform  movement  did 
not  possess  sufficient  influence  to  make  it  much  of  an  item 
in  the  estimation  of  the  papacy,  and  no  definite  response  was 
made  to  this  proffer  to  accept  rebuffs  at  her  hands,  especially 
as  it  was  openly  announced  that  they  were  prepared  to  make 
repeated  advances,  and  submit  to  repeated  rebuffs.  Rome 
therefore  bided  her  time.  She  knew  as  well  as  they  that 
"it  is  one  of  the  necessities  of  the  situation.""  She  knew 
full  well  that  without  her  consent  they  never  could  secure 
the  religious  legislation  which  they  wanted,  and  she  was  de- 
termined, here  as  ever,  to  have  all  the  tokens  of  surrender 
come  from  them.  The  author  of  this  book  personally 
knows  a  gentleman  who,  riding  on  a  railroad  in  California 
in  1886,  fell  into  conversation  with  a  Catholic  priest,  and 
finally  said  to  him,  "  What  is  your  church  going  to  do  with 
the  religious  amendment  movement  ?  are  you  going  to  help 
it  forward?  are  you  going  to  vote  for  it?"  "  Oh,  "said 
the  priest,  "we  have  nothing  to  do  with  that.  We  leave 
that  to  the  Protestants  ;  we  will  let  them  do  all  that.  They 
are  coming  to  us,  and  we  only  have  to  wait." 

Rome  therefore  waited  ;  and  as  she  waited,  the  National 
Reform  movement  rapidly  grew  in  influence,  especially  by 
its  alliances.  And  as  it  grew,  it  continued  to  bid  for  papal 
recognition.  The  Christian  Statesman  of  December  11, 
1884,  said  :  - 

"Whenever  they  [the  Roman  Catholics]  are  willing  to  co-operate  in 
resisting  the  progress  of  political  atheism,  we  will  gladly  join  hands  with 
them." 

And  almost  as  though  it  was  in  response  to  this  in  his 
Encyclical  of  1885,  Pope  Leo  XIII  addressed  to  Catholics 
everywhere  the  following  words  :  — 

"We  exhort  all  Catholics  who  would  devote  careful  attention  to 
public  matters,  to  take  an  active  part  in  all  municipal  affairs  and  elec- 


PAPACY  IN  THE  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS. 

tions,  and  to  further  the  principles  of  the  church  in  all  public  services, 
meetings,  and  gatherings.  All  Catholics  must  make  themselves  felt  as, 
active  elements  in  daily  political  life  in  the  countries  where  they  live 
They  must  penetrate  wherever  possible  in  tlie  administration  of  civil  affairs  ; 
must  constantly  use  their  utmost  vigilance  and  energy  to  prevent  the 
usages  of  liberty  from  going  beyond  the  limits  fixed  by  God's  law.  All 
Catholics  should  do  all  in  their  power  to  cause  the  constitutions  of  States,  and 
legislation,  to  be  modeled  in  the  principles  of  the  true  church.  Ali  Catholic 
writers  and  journalists  should  never  lose  for  an  instant  from  view,  the 
above  prescriptions.  All  Catholics  should  redouble  their  submission  to 
authority,  and  unite  their  whole  heart,  soul,  and  body,  and  mind,  in  the 
defense  of  the  church." 

As  the  pope  thus  definitely  instructed  all  Catholics  to  do 
precisely  what  the  National  Reform  combination  was  already 
doing,  this  was  a  good  sign  that  the  desired  "joining  of 
hands  "  was  not  far  off.  And  at  a  National  Reform  confer- 
ence—  not  convention —  of  ministers  of  a  number  of  differ- 
ent denominations,  'held  at  Saratoga,  New  York,  August 
14-17,  1887,  another  bid  was  made.  The  official  report  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  Saratoga  conference  gives  the  follow- 
ing :  - 

Rev.  Dr.  Price  of  Tennessee. —  "I  wish  to  ask  the  secretary,  Has  any 
attempt  ever  been  made  by  the  National  Reform  Association  to  ascertain 
whether  a  consensus,  or  agreement,  could  be  reached  with  our  Roman 
Catholic  fellow-citizens,  whereby  we  may  unite  in  support  of  the  schools, 
as  they  do  in  Massachusetts  ?  " 

The  secretary. —  "  I  regret  to  say  there  has  not.  .  .  .  But  I  recognize 
it  as  a  wise  and  dutiful  course  on  the  part  of  all  who  are  engaged  in  or 
who  discuss  the  work  of  education,  to  make  the  effort  to  secure  such  an 
agreement." 

Dr.  Price. —  "  I  wish  to  move  that  the  National  Reform  Association 
be  requested  by  this  Conference  to  bring  this  matter  to  the  attention  of 
American  educators  and  of  Roman  Catholic  authorities,  with  a  view  to 
securing  such  a  basis  of  agreement,  if  possible."  ' 

The  motion  was  seconded  and  adopted. 


1  The  Christian  Statesman  of  May  28,  1891,  gives  an  account  of  how  "the 
Protestants  and  Roman  Catholics  united  "  at  a  recent  election  of  the  School 
Board  of  New  Haven,  Conn.,  and  secured  the  election  of  men  who  favored  the 


732  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

In  May,  1888,  United  States  Senator  Henry  W.  Blair 
introduced  in  Congress  a  joint  resolution  to  amend  the 
National  Constitution  so  as  to  recognize  "the  Christian 
religion,"  and  require  the  teaching  of  the  principles  of  that 
religion  in  all  the  public  schools  of  the  country  ;  and  also 
introduced  a  bill  to  enforce  the  observance  of  Sunday  as 
"the  Sabbath,"  "the  Lord's  day,"  "a  day  of  religious 
worship,"  and  "to  secure  to  the  whole  people  rest  from 
toil  during  the  first  day  of  the  week,  their  mental  and  moral 
culture,  and  the  religious  observance  of  the  Sabbath  day." 
As  all  this  was  in  complete  harmony  with  the  instruction 
of  the  pope  to  all  Catholics  ;  and  was  done  upon  the  direct 
solicitation  of  the  National  Reform  combination,  it  served 
to  bring  the  National  Reformers  and  the  papacy  so  much 
the  nearer  to  a  positive  and  declared  union. 

In  November,  1888,  the  American  Sabbath  Union  be- 
came the  predominating  power  in  the  National  Reform 
alliance,  and  December  1,  the  Field  Secretary  of  that  organ- 
ization personally  addressed  to  the  head  of  the  papacy  in 
this  country — •  Cardinal  Gibbons  —  a  letter  asking  him  to 
join  hands  with  them  in  petitioning  Congress  to  pass  the  bill 
for  the  enactment  of  a  national  law  to  "promote"  the  ob- 
servance of  Sunday  "  as  a  day  of  religious  worship.''  The 
Cardinal  promptly  announced  himself  as  "most  happy"  to 
do  so,  in  the  following  letter:  — 


restoration  of  religious  exercises  in  the  public  schools  of  that  city;  and  how  that 
a  committee  of  five,  "  consisting  of  three  Protestants —  Ex-President  Woolsey  of 
Yale,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Harvvood,  and  Rev.  John  E.  Todd  —  and  two  Roman  Catholics 
—  Father  Fitzpatrick  and  Murphy  —  were  appointed  to  arrange  a  form  of 
worship"  for  the  schools.  The  result  was  that  a  responsive  exercise  for  teachers 
and  pupils  was  framed,  in  which  the  following  passage  was  to  be  recited  between 
the  Lord's  prayer  and  the  "  Apostles  '  "  Creed  :  — 

Teacher  —  "Hail,  Mary,  full  of  grace;  the  Lord  is  with  thee;  blessed  art 
Ihou  among  women,  and  blessed  is  the  fruit  of  thy  womb,  Jesus  ! 

Children  Respond. —  "Holy  Mary,  mother  of  God,  pray  for  us  sinners,  now 
and  at  the  hour  of  our  death.  Amen." 


X 


NATIONAL  REFORM  "PETITIONING."  733 

"  CARDINAL'S  RESIDENCE,  408  N.  CHARLES  STREET, 

"BALTIMORE,  December  4,  1888. 

"  REV.  DEAR  SIR  :  I  have  to  acknowledge  your  esteemed  favor  of  the 
1st  instant  in  reference  to  the  proposed  passage  of  a  law  by  Congress 
'against  Sunday  work  in  the  government's  mail  and  military  service,'  etc. 
"  I  am  most  happy  to  add  my  name  to  those  of  the  millions  of  others 
who  are  laudably  contending  against  the  violation  of  the  Christian  Sab- 
bath by  unnecessary  labor,  and  who  are  endeavoring  to  promote  its  decent 
and  proper  observance  by  legitimate  legislation.  As  the  late  Plenary 
Council  of  Baltimore  has  declared,  the  due  observance  of  the  Lord's  day 
contributes  immeasurably  to  the  restriction  of  vice  and  immorality,  and 
to  the  promotion  of  peace,  religion,  and  social  order,  and  cannot  fail  to 
draw  upon  the  nation  the  blessing  and  protection  of  an  overruling  Provi- 
dence. If  benevolence  to  the  beasts  of  burden  directed  one  day's  rest  in 
every  week  under  the  old  law,  surely  humanity  to  man  ought  to  dictate 
the  same  measure  of  rest  under  the  new  law. 

"Your  obedient  servant  in  Christ, 

"JAMES  CARDINAL  GIBBONS, 

'  'Archbishop  of  Baltimore. "  a 

•  And  although  in  this  particular  instance  the  Cardinal 
spoke  only  for  himself,  the  anxious  zeal  of  those  professed 
Protestants  to  secure  an  alliance  with  the  papacy,  hurried 
them  into  counting  every  Catholic  man,  woman,  and  child 
in  the  United  States,  under  the  census  of  1880,  as  having 
actually  signed  the  petition.  This  was  done  at  the  conven- 
tion of  the  National  Reform  allies,  held  in  Washington, 
D.  C.,  under  the  auspices  of  the  American  Sabbath  Union, 
December  11-13,  1888.  In  the  announcements  of  the  conven- 
tion it  had.  been  stated  that  the  church  in  which  the  con- 
vention was  to  meet  would  be  festooned  with  the  names  of  six 
million  petitioners  ;  but  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  first 
meeting,  it  was  stated  that  there  were  fourteen  million  of 
them.  A  question  was  sent  up  asking  how  the  number 
conld  have  grown  so  much  larger  so  suddenly.  Mrs.  Bate- 
ham  was  recalled  to  the  platform  to  answer  the  question, 
and  when  she  answered  it,  the  cause  of  such  a  sudden  and 

2  Senate  Hearing  on  "Sunday  Bill,"  page  18. 


734  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

enormous  growth  was  explained  by  the  fact  that  Cardinal 
Gibbons  had  written  the  above  letter  saying  he  was  most 
happy  to  add  his  name  to  the  others,  and  solely  upon  the 
strength  of  his  name,  seven  million  two  hundred  thousand 
Catholics  were  counted  as  petitioners. 

Thus  matters  stood  for  about  one  year,  until  Novem- 
ber 12,  1889,  when  the  "Congress  of  Catholic  Laymen 
of  the  United  States  ''  was' held  in  Baltimore  "to  celebrate 
the  one  hundredth  anniversary  of  the  establishment  of  the 
American  hierarchy. "  In  that  congress  there  was  a  paper 
read  by  Mr.  Manly  B.  Tello,  editor  of  the  Catholic  Universe, 
of  Cleveland,  Ohio,  in  which  it  was  said  :  — 

"  What  we  should  'seek  is  an  en  rapport  with  the  Protestant  Chris- 
tians who  desire  to  keep  Sunday  holy.  .  .  .  We  can  bring  the  Protestant 
masses  over  to  the  reverent  moderation  of  the  Catholic  Sunday." 

And  the  platform  which  was  adopted  as  the  result  of  the 
discussions  in  the  congress,  declared  upon  this  point  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"  There  are  many  Christian  issues  to  which  Catholics  could  come  to- 
gether with  non-Catholics,  and  shape  civil  legislation  for  the  public 
weal.  In  spite  of  rebuff  and  injustice  and  overlooking  zealotry,  we 
should  seek  alliance  with  non-Catholics  for  proper  Sunday  observance. 
Without  going  over  to  the  Judaic  Sabbath,  we  can  bring  the  masses 
over  to  the  moderation  of  the  Christian  Sunday." 

This  was  one  of  the  "planks"  of  the  platform  which 
was  "received  with  the  greatest  demonstrations  ;"  and  the 
whole  platform  was  adopted  "without  discussion"  and 
"without  a  dissenting  voice."  As  all  the  papers  that  were 
read  in  the  congress,  as  well  as  the  platform,  had  to  pass 
the  inspection  of  the  hierarchy  before  they  were  presented 
in  public,  these  statements  are  simply  the  expression  of  the 
papacy  in  official  response  to  the  overtures  which  the  so- 
called  Protestant  theocrats  had  been  so  long  making  to  the 
papacy.  As  was  only  to  be  expected,  it  was  received  by 


THE  BOND    OF   UNION.  735 

them  with  much  satisfaction.     The  American  Sabbath  Union 
joyously  exclaimed  :  — 

"The  National  Lay  Congress  of  Roman  Catholics,  after  correspond- 
ence and  conference  with  the  American  Sabbath  Union,  passed  its  famous 
resolution  in  favor  of  co-operation  with  Protestants  in  Sabbath  reform. 
.  .  .  This  does  not  mean  that  the  millennium  is  to  be  built  in  a  day.  This 
is  only  a  proposal  of  courtship  ;  and  the  parties  thus  far  have  approached 
each  other  shyly." 

And  in  a  temperance  (?)  speech  in  a  temperance  conven- 
tion in  New  York  City,  reported  in  the  National  Temperance 
Advocate,  for  May,  1889,  Archbishop  Ireland  thanked  God 
that  "Protestants  and  Catholics"  "stand  together  in  de- 
manding the  faithful  observance  of  Sunday." 

When  a  union  so  long  desired  as  this  had  been,  has  reached 
the  stage  of  courtship,  actual  marriage  could  not  be  very  far 
off.  Yes,  that  marriage  was  certainly  coming,  and  like 
every  other  feature  of  the  papacy,  it  is  contrary  to  nature  — 
one  woman  (church)  marrying  another  in  order  that  both 
might  more  readily  form  an  adulterous  connection  with  the 
State.  And  the  fruit  of  the  confused  relationship  will  be 
just  that  which  is  pictured  in  the  Scripture  —  a  hideous  non- 
descript monster,  breathing  out  persecution  and  death. 
Kev.  xiii.  11-17. 

Thus  are  the  leaders  of  professed  Protestantism  in  the 
United  States  joined  heart  and  hand  with  the  papacy,  with 
the  sole  purpose  of  creating  in  this  government  an  order  of 
things  identical  with  that  which  created  the  papacy  at  the 
first.  It  is  most  appropriate,  therefore,  that  the  bond  of 
union  which  unites  them  in  the  evil  work,  should  be  the 
very  thing  —  the  day  of  the  sun  —  by  means  of  which  the 
papacy  at  first  secured  control  of  the  civil  power  to  compel 
those  who  did  not  belong  to  the  church  to  submit  to  the  dic- 
tates of  the  church,  and  to  act  as  though  they  did  belong  to  it. 
It  was  by  means  of  Sunday  laws  that  the  church  secured  con- 
trol of  the  civil  power  for  the  furtherance  of  her  ends  when 
the  papacy  was  made.  It  is  appropriate  that  the  same  iden- 


736  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

tical  means  should  be  employed  by  an  apostate  Protestantism 
to  secure  control  of  the  civil  power  for  the  furtherance  of  her 
ends,  and  to  compel  those  who  do  not  belong  to  the  church 
to  submit  to  the  dictates  of  the  church,  and  to  act  as  those 
do  who  do  belong  to  the  church.  And  as  that  evil  intrigue 
back  there  made  the  papacy,  so  will  this  same  thing  here 
make  the  living  image  of  the  papacy.  Two  things  that  are 
so  alike  in  the  making  will  as  surely  be  as  much  alike  when 
they  are  made. 

What  Home  means  by  the  transaction  is  shown  by  a  let- 
ter from  Cardinal  Gibbons  upon  the  subject  of  the  authority 
for  Sunday  observance,  written  but  a  little  while  before  the 
"  Congress  of  Catholic  Laymen"  was  held.  The  letter  was 
written  to  Mr.  E.  E.  Franke,  then  of  Pittsburg,  now  of 
Jersey  City,  N.  J. ,  and  is  as  follows  :  — 

"  CARDINAL'S  RESIDENCE,  ) 

"408  NORTH  CHARLES  ST.,  BALTIMORE,  MD.,  > 

"October  3,  1889.      \ 

"DEAR  MR.  FRANKE  :  At  the  request  of  His  Eminence,  the  Cardinal, 
I  write  to  assure  you  that  you  are  correct  in  your  assertion  that  Protest- 
ants in  observing  the  Sunday  are  following  not  the  Bible,  which  they 
take  as  their  only  rule  of  action,  but  the  tradition  of  the  church.  I  defy 
them  to  point  out  to  me  the  word  'Sunday'  in  the  Bible  ;  if  it  is  not  to 
be  found  there,  and  it  cannot  be,  then  it  is  not  the  Bible  which  they 
follow  in  this  particular  instance,  but  tradition,  and  in  this  they  flatly 
contradict  themselves. 

"The  Catholic  Church  changed  the  day  of  rest  from  the  last  to  the 
first  day  of  the  week,  because  the  most  memorable  of  Christ's  works  was 
accomplished  on  Sunday.  It  is  needless  for  me  to  enter  into  any  elabor- 
ate proof  of  the  matter.  They  cannot  prove  their  point  from  Scripture  ; 
therefore,  if  sincere,  they  must  acknowledge  that  they  draw  their  observ- 
ance of  the  Sunday  from  tradition,  and  are  therefore  weekly  contradict- 
ing themselves.  Yours  very  sincerely, 

"  M.  A.  REARDON." 

This  shows  that  it  is  as  a  Roman  Catholic,  securing 
honor  to  an  institution  of  the  papacy,  and  thus  to  the  papacy 
itself,  that  Cardinal  Gibbons  indorses  the  national  Sunday- 
law  movement ;  and  that  it  is  as  Roman  Catholics  doing  the 
same  thing,  that  the  laity  and  the  hierarchy  of  the  Catholic 


THE  AUTHORITY  FOR  SUNDAY   OBSERVANCE.      737 

Church  in  the  United  States  have  accepted  the  proffer  of  the 
professed  Protestant  combination  for  political  purposes,  and 
have  joined  hands  with  this  combination  in  its  aims  upon 
the  institutions  of  the  country. 

The  Cardinal  understands  what  he  is  doing  a  great  deal 
better  than  the  associations  for  religious  legislation  under- 
stand what  they  are  doing.  And  further,  the  Cardinal  un- 
derstands what  they  are  doing  a  great  deal  better  than  they 
themselves  do.  His  letter  also  shows  that  those  who  signed 
the  petition  for  a  Sunday  law,  as  the  Cardinal  did,  were  hon- 
oring the  papacy,  as  the  Cardinal  does. 

What  Kome  means  in  this  may  be  seen  not  only  by  this 
letter,  but  by  the  history  of  the  original  movement  as  given 
in  Chapter  XIII  of  this  book.  The  Cardinal  and  the  rest  of 
the  hierarchy  know  just  how  the  original  movement  worked 
and  accomplished  what  it  did.  All  these  facts  are  familiar 
to  them,  and  they  are  glad  to  see  this  perfect  pattern  of  the 
original  so  strongly  supported  and  so  persistently  urged. 
They  are  indeed  glad  to  join  hands  with  it,  and  to  be 
married  to  it,  for  it  is  in  spirit  and  in  truth  only  a  part  of 
that  of  which  they  themselves  are  a  part. 

And  these  organizations  that  are  so  determined  to  have 
Sunday  laws,  know  as. well  as  Cardinal  Gibbons  does  that 
there  is  no  authority  in  the  Scripture  for  Sunday  observance. 
They  know  as  well  as  he  does  that  there  is  no  other  basis 
for  it  than  tradition,  and  no  other  authority  for  it  than  the 
authority  of  "the  Church."  The  American  Sabbath  Union 
has  issued  a  series  of  "Pearl  of  Days  Leaflets,"  No.  3  of 
which  was  written  by  "Kev."  George  S.  Mott,  a  vice- 
president  of  the  Union,  and  is  entitled  "Saturday  or 
Sunday  —  Which?"  In  this  leaflet,  page  7,  are  the  follow- 
ing words  :  — 

"  Our  opponents  declare,  'We  are  not  satisfied  with  these  inferences 
and  suppositions  ;  show  us  where  the  first  day  is  spoken  of  as  holy,  or  as 
being  observed  instead  of  the  seventh  ;  we  must  have  a  direct  and  posi- 
tive command  of  God.'  We  admit  there  is  no  such  command." 

55 


738  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

The  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union  likewise  oc- 
cupies the  same  position.  Leaflet  No.  3,  of  the  Woman's 
Christian  Temperance  Union,  department  of  Sabbath  ob- 
servance, is  a  concert  exercise  on  the  fourth  commandment 
for  Sunday- schools  and  ''Bands  of  Hope."  From  this  leaflet 
we  copy  the  following  :  — 

"Questions,  —  Why  do  we  not  still  keep  the  seventh  day  for  our 
Sabbath,  instead  of  the  first,  or  Sunday  ? 

"Answer.  —  We  still  keep  one  day  of  rest  after  six  of  work,  thus 
imitating  God's  example  at  creation,  and  at  the  same  time  we  honor  and 
keep  in  memory  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  on  the  first  day 
of  the  week  rose  from  the  dead,  and  thus  completed  our  redemption. 

"  Question  6. —  If  Jesus  wished  the  day  changed,  why  did  he  not 
command  it  ? 

"  Answer.  —  A  command  to  celebrate  the  resurrection  could  not 
wisely  be  made  before  the  resurrection  occurred.  He  probably  gave 
his  own  disciples  such  directions  afterward  when  'speaking  of  the 
things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God.'  " 

In  1885  the  American  Sunday-school  Union  issued  a  one- 
thousand-dollar  prize  essay  on  the  Sunday  question,  written 
by  "  Rev.''  A.  E.  Waffle,  who  is  now  an  ardent  worker  for 
Sunday  laws.  In  this  essay  (pp.  186,  187)  he  plainly  says  :  — 

"Up  to  the  time  of  Christ's  death  no  change  had  been  made  in  the 
day."  And  "So  far  as  the  record  shows,  they  [the  apostles]  did  not, 
however,  give  any  explicit  command  enjoining  the  abandonment  of  the 
seventh-day  Sabbath,  and  its  observance  on  the  first  day  of  the  week." 

The  American  Sabbath  Union  leaflet  above  referred  to, 
corresponds  to  this  precisely,  in  that  it  says  (page  5)  that 
the  observance  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  "grew  up 
spontaneously  in  the  apostolic  age,  and  out  of  the  heart  of 
believers,  and  so  became  the  Sabbath  of  the  Christian  era." 
And  this,  with  a  number  of  other  things,  is  said  by  the 
same*  document  (pp.  6,  7)  to  "furnish  a  reliable  presumption 
that,  during  those  years  following  the  resurrection,  the  first 
day  of  the  week  was  observed  in  a  religious  way. " 


HOW  SUNDAY  CAME  IN.  739 

And  Dr.  Herrick  Johnson,  speaking  for  the  whole  religio- 
political  combination,  before  the  United  States  Senate  Com- 
mittee, December  13,  1888,  confirmed  these  statements  in  the 
following  words  :  — 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "  I  think  that  no  one  who  accepts  the  Bible  doubts 
that  there  is  one  day  in  seven  to  be  observed  as  a  day  of  rest. " 

The  Chairman. —  "  Will  you  just  state  the  authority  ?  " 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "Remember  the  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy.  .  .  . 
Six  days  shall  thou  labor  and  do  all  thy  work." 

The  Chairman. —  "Is  there  any  other  ?  " 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "There  are  references  to  this  law  all  through  the 
Bible." 

The  Chairman. —  "Now  you  come  and  change  that  Sabbath  day  to 
which  the  Lord  refers." 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "That  we  hold  was  changed  by  the  Lord  himself." 

The  Chairman. —  "  When  did  he  do  that,  and  by  what  language  ?" 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "There  was  a  meeting  for  worship  on  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  the  day  the  Lord  arose,  and  seven  days  after 3  there  was  another 
meeting  for  the  same  purpose,  and  it  is  referred  to  as  the  Lord's  day." 

The  Chairman. —  "  After  the  change  ?" 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "Yes,  sir  ;  after  the  change." 

The  Chairman. —  "It  is  based  then  upon  two  or  three  days'  being 
observed  as  days  of  religious  worship  after  the  resurrection  ?  " 

Mr.  Johnson. —  "  Yes,  sir." 

Such,  according  to  the  official  declarations  of  these 
organizations,  is  the  origin  and  basis  of  Sunday  observance. 
And  as  to  the  authority  for  it,  they  are  equally  explicit. 
"Rev."  George  Elliot,  pastor,  1888-1890,  of  the  Foundry 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  Washington,  D.  C.,  is  a  repre- 
sentative of  the  movement.  He  appeared  twice  before 
congressional  committees  as  such  representative.  In  1884,  he 
wrote  an  essay  on  the  Sunday  question,  which  took  a  prize  of 
five  hundred  dollars.  The  essay,  entitled,  "The  Abiding 
Sabbath,"  is  issued  by  the  American  Tract  Society,  and  is 
recommended  everywhere  by  the  Woman's  Christian  Temper- 
ance Union.  In  this  book  (p.  184),  is  the  following  state- 
ment :  — 

3  There  Is  no  such  statement  in  the  Bible. 


740  THE  GREAT   CONSPIRACY. —CONCLUDED. 

"It  is  not  difficult  to  account  for  the  complete  silence  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment so  far  as  any  explicit  command  for  the  Sabbath  or  definite  rules 
for  its  observance  are  concerned.  .  .  .  The  conditions  under  which  the 
early  Chiristian  church  existed  were  not  favorable  for  their  announcement. 
The  early  church,  a  struggling  minority  composed  of  the  poorest  people, 
could  not  have  instituted  the  Christian  Sabbath  in  its  full  force  of 
meaning.  The  ruling  influences  of  government  and  society  were  against 
them." 

And  how  the  ruling  influences  of  government  and  society 
were  turned  in  favor  of  the  Sunday,  so  that  it  could  be  and 
was  instituted  in  its  full  force  of  meaning,  the  following 
extracts  from  pages  213  and  228  of  the  same  book  plainly 
show  :  — 

"For  the  perfect  establishment  of  the  Christian  Sabbath,  as  has 
already  been  observed,  there  was  needed  a  social  revolution  in  the 
Roman  empire.  The  infant  church,  in  its  struggle  through  persecution 
and  martyrdom,  had  not  the  poicer  even  to  keep  the  Lord's  day  perfectly 
itself,  much  less  could  the  sanctity  of  the  day  be  guarded  from  desecra- 
tion by  unbelievers.  We  should  expect,  therefore,  to  find  the  institution 
making  a  deepening  groove  on  society  and  in  history,  and  becoming  a 
well-defined  ordinance  the  very  moment  that  Christianity  became  a  domi- 
nant power.  That  such  was  the  case,  the  facts  fully  confirm.  From  the 
records  of  the  early  church  and  the  works  of  the  Christian  Fathers,  we 
can  clearly  see  the  growth  of 'the  institution  culminating  in  the  famous 
edict  of  Constantine,  when  Christianity  became  the  established  religion  of 
the  empire. 

"The  emperor  Constantine  was  converted,  and  Christianity  became, 
practically,  the  religion  of  the  empire.  It  was  now  possible  to  enforce  the 
Christian,  Sabbath,  and  make  its  observance  universal'.  In  the  year  321, 
consequently,  was  issued  the  famous  edict  of  Constantine,  commanding 
abstinence  from  servile. labor  on  Sunday." 

As  to  the  origin  and  growth  of  Sunday  observance,  and 
its  culmination  in  the  famous  Edict  of  Constantine,  these 
statements  are  strictly  in  accord  witli  the  historical  facts. 
And  that  famous  edict  in  which  the  Sunday  observance  move- 
ment culminated  then,  was  issued  solely  at  the  request  of  the 
church  managers  in  return  for  services  rendered,  and  on  their 
part  was  but  the  culmination  of  their  grand  scheme  to  secure 
control  of  the  civil  power  to  compel  all  to  submit  to  the  dis- 


NO   "  THUS  SAITH  THE  LORD."  7-H 

cipline  and  the  dictates  of  the  church.  Therefore,  by  their 
own  official  and  representative  statements,  we  know  that  they 
know  that  Cardinal  Gibbons  states  the  exact  truth  when  he 
tells  them  that  it  is  the  Catholic  Church  that  has  changed 
the  day  of  rest  from  the  seventh  day  of  the  week  to  the  first, 
and  that  the  original  and  only  authority  for  Sunday  observ- 
ance is  the  authority  of  the  papacy.  This  they  know,  and 
therefore  they  realize  that  their  efforts  are  impotent  to  per- 
suade the  consciences  of  men  in  the  matter  of  Sunday  observ- 
ance. Mr.  Elliott  himself  has  borne  conclusive  testimony 
to  this  in  the  same  book  above  referred  to  (p.  263),  as 
follows  :  — 

"To  make  the  Lord's  day  only  an  ecclesiastical  contrivance,  is  to 
give  no  assurance  to  the  moral  reason,  and  to  lay  no  obligation  upon  a 
free  conscience.  The  church  cannot  maintain  this  institution  by  its  own 
edict.  Council,  assembly,  convocation,  and  synod  can  impose  a  law  on 
the  conscience  only  when  they  are  able  to  back  their  decree  with  '  Thus 
saith  the  Lord.' " 

To  make  Sunday  observance  only  an  ecclesiastical  con- 
trivance is  all  that  he  or  anybody  else  has  ever  been  able 
to  do.  That  is  just  what  these  official  statements  of  those 
organizations  show  that  they  know  it  to  be.  The  only 
edicts  they  are  able  to  show  for  it,  are  the  edicts  of  Constan- 
tine  and  his  successors,  who  in  every  instance  did  only  the 
bidding  of  the  church.  These  are  confessedly  the  only  au- 
thority by  which  they  would  lay  the  observance  of  Sunday 
as  a  law  upon  the  consciences  of  men.  They  cite  no  "Thus 
saith  the  Lord  "  for  the  institution,  nor  for  its  observance. 
On  the  contrary,  they  confess  that  "there  is  no  such  com- 
mand ;  "  they  confess  that  there  is  no  command  "  enjoiniig 
the  abandonment  of  the  seventh-day  Sabbath  and  its  observ- 
ance on  the  first  day  of  the  week  ;  "  they  confess  "complete 
silence  of  the  New  Testament "  so  far  as  concerns  any  com- 
mand to  observe  Sunday,  or  rules  as  to  how  it  should  be 
observed;  they  confess  that  they  have  only  "presumption," 
and  "probability,"  and  a  "spontaneous  growth  out  of 


742  THE    GREAT   CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

the  hearts  of  believers,"  for  its  origin  and  basis,  and  the 
church  as  "  a  dominant  power"  issuing  "the  famous  Edict 
of  Oonstantine  "  for  its  authority.  Therefore,  by  their  own 
showing  and  upon  their  own  confession,  the  observance  of 
Sunday  is  of  "no  obligation  upon  a  free  conscience."  Yet 
council,  assembly,  convocation,  and  synod  have  decreed 
that  Sunday  shall  be  observed  by  all ;  and  as  they  are  not 
able  to  back  their  decree  with  a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord," 
they  are  determined  now,  as  those  others  were  at  the  first,  to 
back  it  with  the  Thus  saith  the  State,  and  lay  it  as  an  obliga- 
tion upon —  not  free,  but  —  enslaved  consciences,  compelling 
men  to  do  homage  to  the  authority  of  the  papacy. 

Yet  in  the  face  of  all  this  testimony  and  ever  so  much 
more  to  the  same  effect,  and  in  the  face  of  the  whole  history 
of  the  Sunday  institution,  they  have  the  effrontery  to  present 
the  plea  that  it  is  only  a  "civil"  Sunday  observance  that 
they  want  to  enforce  ! 5  They  therefore  pass  resolutions,  and 
adopt  planks  such  as  the  following  from  the  National  Pro- 
hibition platform  of  188T  :  — 

"  10.  For  the  preservation  and  defense  of  the  Sabbath  as  a  civil 
institution,  without  oppressing  any  who  religiously  observe  the  same  or 
any  other  day  than  the  first  day  of  the  week." 

None  of  those  Prohibitionists,  however,  have  attempted 
to  explain  just  why,  in  their  efforts  to  preserve  and  defend 
the  Sabbath  as  a  civil  institution,  they  should  refrain  from 
oppressing  only  those  who  "religiously  observe"  Sunday 
or  some  other  day.  This  betrays  a  lurking  consciousness  of 
the  fact  that  such  legislation  is  oppressive.  It  likewise  re- 
veals the  utter  impossibility  of  either  defining  or  defending 
such  a  thing  as  a  civil  Sabbath.  There  is  no  such  thing  as 
a  civil  Sabbath,  and  these  organizations  mean  no  such  thing 
as  a  civil  Sunday.  The  whole  subject  is  religious  from 
beginning  to  end.  There  never  was  a  law  enacted,  nor  a 
single  step  taken,  in  favor  of  Sunday  that  had  not  a  religious 

5  See  pages  312-319  of  this  book. 


THAT  "MISERABLE  EXCUSE." 

purpose  and  intent ;  and  there  can  never  be  any  such  thing 
without  such  purpose  ;  for  the  institution  is  religious  in 
itself. 

In  this  connection  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  remember  that 
it  was  altogether  for  "civil"  reasons  that  Roger  Williams 
was  banished,  that  the  Baptists  and  the  Quakers  were  dealt 
with  as  they  were  by  the  New  England  theocracy  ;  and  that 
it  was  for  the  good  of  the  State  and  to  preserve  the  State, 
that  is,  for  "civil"  reasons,  that  the  emperor  Justin  com- 
pelled all  to  be  Catholics,  and  that  the  alliance  was  first 
formed  with  the  church  and  such  legislation  enacted.6  In 
the  scathing  words  of  another,  this  "miserable"  "civil" 
plea  is  best  described:  "The  rulers  of  Massachusetts  put 
the  Quakers  to  death,  and  banished  the  '  Antinomiaiis  '  and 
'Anabaptists,'  not  because  of  their  religious  tenets,  but  be- 
cause of  their  violations  of  the  civil  laws.  This  is  the 
justification  which  they  pleaded,  and  it  was  the  best  they 
could  make.  Miserable  excuse  !  ...  So  the  defenders  of 
the  Inquisition  have  always  spoken  and  written  in  justifica- 
tion of  that  awful  and  most  iniquitous  tribunal." — £aird.'t 

As  the  members  of  this  whole  combination  taken  singly 
and  together  are  wedded  to  the  idea  of  a  man-made 
theocracy,  the  practical  effects  of  the  movement,  if  successful, 
would  seem  to  be  sufficiently  discernible  from,  the  examples 
that  have  been  given  in  the  papal,  the  Calvinistic,  and  the 
Puritan  theocracies.  This  probability  is  greatly  strengthened 
by  the  fact  not  only  that  it  is  such  a  perfect  likeness  of  the 
papal  theocracy  and  is  joined  to  the  papacy  itself,  but  that 

6  Pages  603,  607,  and  541,  of  this  book. 

7  "Religion  in  America,"  book  ii,  chap,  xix,  par.  14,  note.     "This  is  the 
stale  pretense  of  the  clergy  in  all  countries:  after  they  have  solicited  the  govern- 
ment to  make  penal  laws  against  those  they  call  heretics  or  schismatics,  and 
prompted  the  magistrates  to  a  vigorous  execution,  when  they  lay  all  the  odium 
on  the  civil  power;  for  whom  they  have  no  excuse,  but  that  such  men  suffered 
not  for  religion,  but  for  disobedience  to  law."  —  Buckle,  "  History  of  Civiliza- 
tion," v  I  i,  pp.  338,  339,  note. 


744  THE   GREAT   CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

great  pride  is  taken  in  appealing  to  the  principles  and  prac- 
tices of  the  Puritan  theocracy.  It  was  declared  in  the 
Washington,  D.  C.,  convention,  December  11-13,  1888, 
that  the  object  of  the  movement  is  to  make  Sunday  "the 
ideal  Sabbath  of  the  Puritans."  A  favorite  invocation  of 
"  Kev."  M.  A.  Gault  is  that  it  might  "  rain  Puritanism,"  all 
the  way  from  six  weeks  to  three  months.  Dr.  Herrick 
Johnson,  in  his  noted  philippic  against  the  Sunday  news- 
paper, exclaims:  "Oh,  for  a  breath  of  the  old  Puritan!" 
Having  so  explicitly  ^declared  their  intentions  in  merely 
working  for  their  much-desired  laws,  it  were  almost  super- 
fluous to  inquire  whether  there  will  not  be  persecution 
were  it  not  for  the  singular  apathy  and  the  overweening 
confidence  of  the  people  generally  with  regard  to  the 
scheme.  To  ask  the  question,  however,  is  on-ly  to  ask 
whether  they  may  be  expected  to  use  the  power  for  which 
they  are  grasping,  should  they  succeed  in  their  designs. 
And  to  this  it  would  seem  to  be  a  sufficient  answer,  merely 
again  to  ask,  If  they  do  not  intend  to  use  the  power,  then 
why  are  they  making  such  strenuous  efforts  to  get  it  ?  For 
an  answer  we  might  cite  the  reader  to  pages  714,  715  of 
this  book.  But  in  addition  to  that,  this  question  has  been 
asked  to  themselves,  and  they  have  answrered  it.  At  the 
Lakeside,  Ohio,  convention,  there  was  asked  the  following 
question  :  — 

"  Will  not  the  National  Reform  movement  result  in  persecution  against 
those  who  on  some  points  believe  differently  from  the  majority,  even  as 
the  recognition  of  the  Christian  religion  by  the  Roman  power  resulted  in 
grievous  persecution  against  true  Christians  ? " 

The  answer  given  by  Dr.  Me  Allister  is  as  follows  :  — 

"Now  notice  the  fallacy  here.  The  recognition  of  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic religion  by  the  State,  made  that  State  a  persecuting  power.  Why  ? 
—  Because  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  is  a  persecuting  religion.  If 
true  Christianity  is  a  persecuting  religion,  then  the  acknowledgment  of 
our  principles  by  the  State  will  make  the  State  a  persecutor.  But  if  the 
true  Christian  religion  is  a  religion  of  liberty,  a  religion  that  regards  the 


DR.   MCALLISTER  AND  POl'E  PELAGIUS.  745 

rights  of  all,  then  the  acknowledgment  of  those  principles  by  the  State 
will  make  the  State  the  guardian  of  all  men,  and  the  State  will  he  no  per- 
secutor. True  religion  never  persecutes." 

There  is  indeed  a  fallacy  here,  but  it  is  not  in  the  ques- 
tion ;  it  is  in  the  answer.  That  which  made  the  Roman 
State  a  persecuting  power,  says  the  Doctor,  was  its  recogni- 
tion of  the  Catholic  religion,  "'which  is  a  persecuting  relig- 
ion." But  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  is  not  the  only 
persecuting  religion  that  has  been  in  the  world.  Presbyte- 
rianism  persecuted  while  John  Calvin  ruled  in  Geneva  ;  it 
persecuted  while  the  Convenanters  ruled  in  Scotland  ;  it  per- 
secuted while  it  held  the  power  in  England.  Congregation- 
alism persecuted  while  it  had  the  power  in  New  England. 
Episcopalianism  persecuted  in  England  and  in  Virginia. 
Every  religion  that  has  been  allied  with  the  civil  power,  or 
that  has  controlled  the  civil  power,  has  been  a  persecuting 
religion  ;  and  such  will  always  be  the  case. 

Dr.  Me  Allister's  implied  statement  is  true,  that  "true 
Christianity  never  persecutes  ; "  but  it  is  true  only  because 
true  Christianity  never  will  allow  itself  to  be  allied  in  any 
way  with  the  civil  power,  or  to  receive  any  support  from  it. 
The  National  Reform  Association  does  propose  to  "enforce 
upon  all,  the  laws  of  Christian  morality  ; "  it  proposes  to 
have  the  government  adopt  the  National  Reform  religion, 
and  then  "lay  its  hand  upon  any  religion  that  does  not  con- 
form to  it ; "  and  it  asserts  that  the  civil  power  has  the  right 
"  to  command  the  consciences  of  men."  The  whole  Sunday- 
law  movement  does  propose  to  enforce  the  observance  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  or  the  Lord's  day.  Now  any  such  thing 
carried  into  effect,  as  is  here  plainly  proposed  by  the  Asso- 
ciations, can  never  be  anything  else  than  persecution. 

But  Dr.  McAllister  affirms  that  the  National  Reform 
movement,  if  successful,  would  not  lead  to  persecution, 
"because  true  religion  never  persecutes."  The  Doctor's 
argument  amounts  only  to  this  :  The  National  Reform  re- 
ligion is  the  true  religion.  True  religion  never  persecutes. 
Therefore  to  compel  men  to  conform  to  the  true  religion, — 


746  THE   GREAT  CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

that  is,   the  religion  that  controls  the  civil  power, — is  not 
persecution. 

In  A.  D.  556,  Pope  Pelagius  called  upon  Narses  to  com- 
pel certain  parties  to  obey  the  pope's  command.  Narses  re- 
fused, on  the  ground  that  it  would  be  persecution.  The 
pope  answered  Narses's  objection  with  this  argument  :  — 

"  Be  not  alarmed  at  the  idle  talk  of  some,  crying  out  against  persecu- 
tion, and  reproaching  the  church,  as  if  she  delighted  in  cruelty,  when 
she  punishes  evil  with  wholesome  severities,  or  procures  the  salvation  of 
souls.  He  alone,  persecutes  who  forces  to  evil.  But  to  restrain  men  from 
doing  evil,  or  to  punish  those  who  have  done  it,  is  not  persecution,  or 
cruelty,  but  love  of  mankind."8 

Compare  this  with  Dr.  Me  Allister's  answer,  and  find  any 
difference  in  principle  between  them  who  can.  There  is  no 
difference.  The  arguments  are  identical.  It  is  the  essential 
spirit  of  the  papacy  which  is  displayed  in  both,  and  in  that 
of  Pope  Pelagius  no  more  than  in  that  of  Dr.  Me  Allister ; 
and  he  spoke  for  the  whole  National  Reform  combination 
when  he  said  it. 

Another  question,  in  the  form  of  a  statement,  at  the 
same  time  and  place  was  this  :  — 

"There  is  a  law  in  the  State  of  Arkansas  enforcing  Sunday  observ. 
ance  upon  the  people,  and  the  result  has  been  that  many  good  persons 
have  not  only  been  imprisoned,  but  have  lost  their  property,  and  even 
their  lives." 

To  which  Dr.  Me  Allister  coolly  replied  :  — 

"It  is  better  that  a  few  should  suffer,  than  that  the  whole  nation 
should  lose  its  Sabbath." 

This  argument  is  identical  with  that  by  which  the  Phari- 
sees in  Christ's  day  justified  themselves  in  killing  him.  It 
was  said  :  "  It  is  expedient  for  us  that  one  man  should  die 
for  the  people,  and  that  the  whole  nation  perish  not."  John 
xi,  50.  And  then  says  the  record:  "Then  from  that  day 
8  Bower's  "  History  of  the  Popes,"  Pelagius,  par.  6. 


THEY  DO  PERSECUTE. 

forth  they  took  counsel  together  for  to  put  him  to  death." 
Verse  53. 

The  argument  used  in  support  of  the  claim  of  right  to  use 
this  power,  is  identical  with  that  used  by  the  papacy  in  in- 
augurating her  persecutions;  the  argument  in  justification 
of  the  -use  of  the  power,  is  identical  with  that  by  which  the 
murderers  of  Jesus  Christ  justified  themselves  in  accomplish- 
ing that  wicked  deed  ;  and  if  anybody  thinks  that  these  men 
in  our  day,  proceeding  upon  the  identical  theory,  in  the 
identical  way,  joining  themselves  to  the  papacy,  and  justify- 
ing their  proceedings  by  arguments  identical  with  those  of 
the  papacy  and  the  murderous  Pharisees, —  if  anybody 
thinks  that  these  men  will  stop  short  of  persecution,  he  has 
vastly  more  confidence  than  the  author  of  this  book  has,  in 
apostate  preachers  in  possession  of  civil  power. 

Nor  are  we  left  to  conjecture  even  in  this.  That  they 
are  ready  to  persecute,  and  to  justify  their  persecution,  has 
already  been  abun4antly  demonstrated. 

It  may  be  known  to  the  reader  that  there  is  a  consider- 
able and  constantly  growing  number  of  people  in  the  United 
States  known  as  Seventh-day  Adventists,  besides  the  denomi- 
nation known  as  Seventh-day  Baptists,  who  exercise  the 
right  to  think  for  themselves  religiously  as  well  as  otherwise, 
and  to  believe  and  decide  for  themselves  as  to  what  the 
Bible  requires  with  respect  to  their  duty  toward  God.  "  They 
observe  the  seventh  day  as  the  Sabbath  according  to  the 
plain  reading  of  the  fourth  commandment,  and  quietly  carry 
on  their  business  on  Sunday  as  on  other  days.  These  peo- 
ple are  found  in  all  the  States  and  Territories  of  the  Union, 
in  numbers  ranging  from  a  few  to  several  thousands  in 
different  places.  And  from  1885  up  to  the  very  hour  in  1894 
when  this  book  went  to  press,  in  Arkansas,  Tennessee,  Mary- 
land, and  Georgia  in  succession,  and  in  the  last  three  States 
both  in  succession  and  at  once,  these  people  have  been 
persecuted  by  fines,  by  imprisonments,  and  by  working  in 
the  chain-gang,  for  refusing  to  observe  Sunday. 


748  THE   GREAT   CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

The  procedure  is  well  described  in  the  following  extract 
from  the  speech  of  Senator  Crockett  of  Arkansas,  in  the 
State  Senate,  in  behalf  of  the  persecuted  ones  in  that  State. 
We  cannot  see  how  any  lover  of  justice  can  fail  to  assent  to 
the  Senators  opinion  as  expressed  in  the  closing  sentence. 

.  "Let  me,  sir,  illustrate  the  operation  of  the  present  law  by  one  or 
two  examples.  A  Mr.  Swearingen  came  from  a  Northern  State  and  set- 
tled on  a  farm  in county.  His  farm  was  four  miles  from  town, 

and  far  away  from  any  house  of  religious  worship.  He  was  a  member 
of  the  Seventh-day  Adventist  Church,  and  after  having  sacredly  ob- 
served the  Sabbath  of  his  people  (Saturday)  by  abstaining  from  all  secu- 
lar work,  he  and  his  son,  a  lad  of  seventeen,  on  the  first  day  of  the  week 
went  quietly  about  their  usual  avocations,  They  disturbed  no  one  — 
interfered  with  the  rights  of  no  one,  But  they  were  observed,  and  re- 
ported to  the  Grand  Jury,  indicted,  arrested,  tried,  convicted,  fined,  and 
having  no  money  to  pay  the  fine,  these  moral,  Christian  citizens  of  Ar- 
kansas were  dragged  to  the  county  jail  and  imprisoned  like  felons  for 
twenty-five  days  —  and  for  what  ?  —  For  daring,  in  this  so-called  land  of 
liberty,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1887,  to  worship  God. 

"  Was  this  the  end  of  the  story  ?  —  Alas,  no  sir  !  They  were  turned 
out ;  and  the  old  man's  only  horse,  his  sole  reliance  to  make  bread  for 
his  children,  was  levied  on  to  pay  the  fine  and  costs,  amounting  to  thirty- 
eight  dollars.  The  horse  sold  at  action  for  twenty-seven  dollars.  A 
few  days  afterward  the  sheriff  came  again,  and  demanded  thirty-six  dol- 
lars, eleven  dollars  balance  due  on  fine  and  costs,  and  twenty-five  dollars 
for  board  for  himself  and  son  while  in  jail.  And  when  the  poor  old 
man  —  a  Christian,  mind  you  —  told  him  with  tears  that  he  had  no 
money,  he  promptly  levied  on  his  only  cow,  but  was  persuaded  to  ac- 
cept bond,  and  the  amount  was  paid  by  contributions  from  his  friends  of 
the  same  faith.  Sir,  my  heart  swells  to  bursting  with  indignation  as  I 
repeat  to  you  the  infamous  story." 

Nor  did  the  unjust  proceeding  stop  here.  The  Supreme 
Court  confirmed  the  judgments  which  sanctioned  these  in- 
iquitous proceedings,  and  it  confirmed  them  under  a  Con- 
stitution which  declares :  — 

"All  men  have  a  natural  and  indefeasible  right  to  worship  Almighty 
God  according  to  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences  ;  no  man  can  of 
right  be  compelled  to  attend,  erect,  or  support  any  place  of  worship,  or 
to  maintain  any  ministry  against  his  consent.  No  human  authority  can, 
in  any  case  or  manner  whatsoever,  control  or  interfere  with  the  right  of 


"  THE   GOOD   SEED." 

conscience  ;  and  no  preference  shall  ever  be  given  by  tbe  law  to  any 
religious  establishment,  denomination,  or  mode  of  worship,  above  any 
other." 

The  Supreme  Courts  of  Tennessee  and  Maryland  likewise 
confirmed  the  like  procedure  in  those  States,  and  under 
constitutions  containing  substantially  the  same  provisions. 
And  even  the  United  States  Circuit  Court  for  the  Western 
District  of  Tennessee  confirmed  it  alias  "due  process  of 
law"  under  the  United  States  Constitution  ;  and  plainly  and 
in  so  many  words  justified  it  as  persecution  !  Here  are  the 
words :  — 

"  If  the  human  impulse  to  rest  on  as  many  days  as  one  can  have  for 
rest  from  toil  is  not  adequate,  as  it  usually  is,  to  secure  abstention  from 
daily  vocations  on  Sunday,  one  may,  and  many  thousands  do,  work  on 
that  day,  without  complaint  from  any  source  ;  but  if  one  ostentatiously 
labors  for  the  purpose  of  emphasizing  his  distaste  for,  or  his  disbelief  in, 
the  custom,  he  may  be  made  to  suffer  for  his  defiance  by  persecutions,  if  you 
call  them  so,  on  the  part  of  the  great  majority,  who  will  compel  him  to 
rest  when  they  rest."  9 

It  is  by  no  means  certain  that  the  strict  Sunday  observers 
of  these  States  are  any  worse  than  would  be  those  of  any 
other  State,  in  like  circumstances.  A  very  strong  sug- 
gestion in  this  direction  is  the  fact,  that  although  accounts 
of  these  persecutions  are  not  only  a  matter  of  public  record 
in  the  proceedings  of  courts  and  legislatures,  but  were  pub- 
lished and  denounced  by  the  secular  papers  throughout  the 
country,  and  too  by  such  papers  as  the  World  and  the  Sun 
of  New  York  City  ;  the  Inter  Ocean,  the  Tribune,  and  oth- 
ers of  Chicago  ;  the  Globe-Democrat  and  the  Republic,^  St. 
Louis  ;  and  the  Boston  Magazine,  the  Arena ;  yet  not  a 
half-dozen  religious  papers  in  all  the  land  ever  spoke  a  word 
against  it. 


9  This  decision  and  tbe  practice  which  -called  it  out,  the  New  York  Inde- 
pendent, August  6,  1891,  fitly  described  as  "bad  law,  bad  morals,  and  bad  re- 
ligion." The  decision  does  in  fact  justify  all  persecution  from  that  of  Jesus 
Christ,  to  this  case  at  bar. 


750  THE    GREAT   CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

True,  the  National  Keforra  papers  mentioned  it,  but  only 
to  apologize  for  it  or  to  justify  it.  And  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  National  Reform  leaders  as  well  as  papers,  have 
justified  it  all.  The  Christian  Statesman  of  June  4,  1891, 
in  its  leading  editorial,  stirring  up  the  people  of  Michigan  to 
sow  "  the  good  seed"  of  Sunday-law  enforcement,  referred 
to  these  persecutions,  and  soothingly  remarked  that  "these 
instances  have  occurred  in  three  States  only,"  and  that  then 
only  one  person  "  ever  died  from  such  a  cause." 

And  as  for  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Courts  which 
we  have  named,  they  have  abundant  precedent  in  the  decis- 
ions of  the  Supreme  Courts  of  Massachusetts,  New  York, 
Pennsylvania,  and  others  of  the  original  thirteen  States,  which 
have  perpetuated  the  colonial  Sunday  legislation,  which  was 
copied  from  the  British  system,  which  was  derived  directly 
from  the  papal  system,  and  which  in  turn  has  been  copied 
in  the  legislation,  and  perpetuated  by  the  decisions,  of  the 
Supreme  Courts  of  all  the  younger  States  of  the  Union- 
And  now,  instead  of  following  the  splendid  example  of 
California  and  lifting  the  legislation  of  the  States  up  to  the 
level  of  the  national  principles,  the  great  effort  is,  and  the 
Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Western  District 
of  Tennessee  at  least  has  fully  endorsed  the  effort,  to  bring 
down  the  national  principles  and  procedure  to  the  level  of 
those  of  the  States,  and  so  to  turn  this  nation  into  the 
Romish  tide,  and  commit  it  to  papal  principles,  to  the  sup- 
port of  papal  institutions,  and  to  the  enforcement  of  the 
chief  of  all  papal  observances. 

Religious  bigotry  is  ever  the  same  everywhere.  And  the 
movement  to  secure  the  enactment  of  National  Sunday  laws 
is  simply  an  attempt  to  spread  over  the  whole  nation  the 
same  wicked  persecutions  that  have  appeared  in  these  lo- 
calities. 

And  this  is  but  the  preliminary  step  to  the  crushing  out 
of  all  freedom  of  religious  thought  and  action.  For,  by  what 
right,  or  upon  what  authority,  do  they  presume  to  do  this? 
We  have  seen  that  by  their  own  plain  statements  they  con- 


INALIENABLE   RIGHT.  751 

fess  that  there  is  no  command  of  God  for  Sunday  observ- 
ance. Yet  they  propose  to  compel  all  in  the  nation  to  keep 
Sunday  as  an  obligation  to  God.  By  what  right,  then,  does 
this  great  combination  demand  State  and  national  laws  com- 
pelling people  to  observe,  as  an  obligation  to  God,  that  for 
which  there  is  no  command  of  God  ? 

Where  there  is  no  command  of  God,  there  is  no  obliga- 
tion toward  God.  In  this  demand,  therefore,  they  do  in 
fact  put  themselves  in  the  place  of  God,  and  require  that 
their  will  shall  be  accepted  as  the  will  of  God.  They  re- 
quire that  their  views,  without  any  command  from  the  Lord, 
shall  be  enforced  upon  all  men  ;  and  that  all  men  shall  be 
required  to  yield  obedience  thereto  as  to  an  obligation  en- 
joined by  the  Lord. 

Now  it  is  the  inalienable  right  of  every  man  to  dissent 
from  any  and  every  church  doctrine,  and  to  disregard  every 
church  ordinance,  institution,  or  rite.  All  but  papists  will 
admit  this.  Therefore,  whenever  the  State  undertakes  to 
enforce  the  observance  of  any  church  ordinance  or  institu- 
tion, and  thus  makes  itself  the  champion  of  the  Church,  it 
simply  undertakes  to  rob  men  of  their  inalienable  right  to 
think  and  choose  for  themselves  in  matters  of  religion  and 
church  order.  Men  are  therefore,  and  thereby,  compelled 
either  to  submit  to  be  robbed  of  their  inalienable  right  of 
freedom  of  thought  in  religious  things,  or  else  to  disregard 
the  authority  of  the  State.  And  the  man  of  sound  principle 
and  honest  conviction  will  never  hesitate  as  to  which  of  the 
two  things  he  will  do. 

When  the  State  undertakes  to  enforce  the  observance  of 
church  ordinances  or  institutions,  and  thus  makes  itself  the 
champion  and  partisan  of  the  church,  then  the  inalienable 
right  of  men  to  dissent  from  CHUKCH  doctrines  and  to  disre- 
gard church  ordinances  or  institutions,  is  extended  to  the 
authority  of  the  STATE  in  so  far  as  it  is  thus  exercised.  And 
that  which  is  true  of  church  doctrines,  ordinances,  and  insti- 
tutions, is  equally  true  of  religious  doctrines  and  exercises  of 
all  kinds. 


752  THE   GREAT   CONSPIRACY.— CONCLUDED. 

Now  Sunday  is,  and  is  acknowledged  even  by  them- 
selves to  be,  but  a  church  institution  only.  And  when  the 
State  enforces  Sunday  observance,  it  does  compel  submis- 
sion to  church  authority,  and  conformity  to  church  discipline; 
and  does  thereby  invade  the  inalienable  right  of  dissent  from 
church  authority  and  discipline.  If  the  State  can  rightfully 
do  this  in  this  one  thing,  it  can  do  so  in  all ;  and  therefore  in 
doing  this  it  does  in  effect  destroy  all  freedom  of  religious 
thought  and  action.10 

Yet  strictly  speaking,  it  is  not  their  own  will  nor  their 
own  views  which  they  propose  to  have  enforced.  Protest- 
ants did  not  create  the  Sunday  institution  ;  they  did  not 
originate  Sunday  observance.  Protestantism  inherited  both 
the  Sunday  institution  and  Sunday  observance.  The  Catho- 
lic Church  originated  Sunday  observance.  The  papacy  sub- 
stituted the  Sunday  institution  for  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord, 
enforced  its  acceptance  and  observance  upon  all,  and  prohib- 
ited under  a  curse  the  keeping  of  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord. 
She  did  it  and  justified  herself  in  it,  precisely  as  these  now 
do.  That  is,  by  tradition  and  "presumptions"  and  "spon- 
taneous growths  from  the  hearts  of  believers,"  and  by 
what  Christ  "probably"  taught,  or  intended  to  teach,  or 
would  have  taught  if  the  matter  had  only  been  brought  to 
his  attention. 

.  There  is  authority  for  Sunday  observance.  It  is  the 
authority  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Therefore,  whoever  ob- 
serves Sunday,  does  recognize  the  authority  of  the  papacy, 
and  does  do  homage  to  the  Catholic  Church.  The  enact- 
ment of  Sunday  laws  does  recognize  the  authority  of  the 
Catholic  Church  ;  the  enforcement  of  Sunday  observance 
does  compel  homage  and  obedience  to  the  papacy.  Just 
what  there  is  in  this  movement,  therefore,  is  the  literal  ful- 
fillment of  that  prophecy  in  Revelation  xiii,  11-17.  It  is  the 
making  of  the  image  of  the  papal  beast  ;  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  THE  WORSHIP  OF  THE  BEAST  AND  HIS  IMAGE. 
10  See  page  688,  par.  2,  3,  of  this  book. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 


THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

first  edition  of  this  book  was  finished  and  went  to 
JL  press  in  August,  1891.  In  this  chapter  in  that  edition, 
the  author  discussed  the  probabilities  that  The  Great  Con- 
spiracy would  succeed.  At  that  time  we  pointed  out  and 
discussed  at  large  the  encroachments  by  which,  in  violation 
of  every  principle  of  the  Constitution,  the  religious  power 
had  been  enabled  to  fasten  itself  upon  the  government  to 
such  an  extent  that  it  was  confessedly  "  impossible  "  to  shake 
it  off;  namely,  Government  chaplaincies,  religious  proclama- 
tions by  the  president,  and  appropriation  of  public  money 
to  the  churches  by  Congress.  We  also  exposed  the  organ- 
ized attempts  which  were  -then  being  made  in  Congress, 
through  the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution  recog- 
nizing "the  Christian  religion,"  and  the  bills  proposing  to 
require  the  observance  of  Sunday  by  a  national  law. 

We  cited  the  weighty  words  of  Congress  —  both  Senate 
and  House  —  spoken  in  1829-30  when  the  same  question  was 
before  it,  as  follows  :  — 

"The  Jewish  government  was  a  theocracy,  which  enforced  religious 
observances ;  and  though  the  committee  would  hope  that  no  portion  of 
the  citizens  of  our  country  would  willingly  introduce  a  system  of  relig- 
ious coercion  in  our  civil  institutions,  the  example  of  other  nations 
should  admonish  us  to  watch  carefully  against  its  earliest  indication. 
.  .  .  Among  all  the  religious  persecutions  with  which  almost  every  page 
of  modern  history  is  stained,  no  victim  ever  suffered  but  for  the  violation 
of  what  government  denominated  the  law  of  God.  To  prevent  a  similar 

56  [T531 


754  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

train  of  evils  in  this  country,  the  Constitution  has  wisely  withheld  from 
our  government  the  power  of  defining  the  divine  law.  .  .  . 

"Extensive  religious  combinations  to  effect  a  political  object,  are,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  committee,  always  dangerous.  This  first  effort  of  the 
kind  calls  for  the  establishment  of  a  principle,  which,  in  the  opinion  of 
the  committee,  would  lay  the  foundation  for  dangerous  innovations  upon 
the  spirit  of  the  Constitution,  and  upon  the  religious  rights  of  the  citi- 
zens." 

Knowing  that  extensive  religious  combinations  to  effect 
a  political  object,  are  indeed  always  dangerous  ;  and  know- 
ing that  here  existed  the  most  extensive  religious  combina- 
tion that  it  was  possible  to  form  in  the  United  States  —  and 
formed  for  this  very  purpose  ;  we  knew  that  the  danger 
from  it  was  real.  And  in  view  of  this  dangerous  situation 
as  it  then  was,  we  closed  the  book  with  the  following 
words  :  — 

' '  CONCLUSION. 

"The  principles  exemplified  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  as  respects  religion,  were  first  announced  by 
Jesus  Christ,  and  were  preached  to  the  world  by  his  apostles 
and  the  early  Christians.  For  two  hundred  and  fifty  years 
they  were  opposed  by  the  Roman  empire.  But  at  last  that 
empire  was  compelled  to  confess  the  justice  of  the  principles, 
and  so  to  acknowledge  the  victory  of  Christianity. 

"  Then  ambitious  bishops  and  political  ecclesiastics  took 
advantage  of  a  political  crisis  to  secure  control  of  the  civil 
power,  and  in  the  name  of  Christianity  to  pervert  the  victory 
which  Christianity  had  so  nobly  won.  This  created  the  pa- 
pacy, a  religious  despotism,  and  speedily  wrought  the  ruin 
of  the  Roman  empire,  and  proved  a  curse  to  the  ages  that 
followed. 

"Then  came  Protestantism,  casting  off  the  yoke  of  the 
papacy,  and  restating  the  principles  of  Christianity  respect- 
ing religion  and  the  State.  Yet,  from  Martin  Luther  to 
Roger  Williams,  in  every  place  and  in  every  form,  wherever 
it  was  possible,  professed  Protestantism,  following  the  ex- 
ample of  the  papacy,  seized  upon  the  civil  power,  and  used 


ENCROACHMENTS   UPON  THE   CONSTITUTION.      755 

it  to  restrict  and  repress  tlie  freedom  of  the  mind,  and  to 
persecute  those  who  chose  to  think  differently  from  the  re- 
ligious majority. 

"Thus  upon  a  test  of  ages,  by  paganism,  Catholicism, 
and  false  Protestantism,  there  was  demonstrated  to  the 
world  that  any  connection  between  religion  and  the  State  is 
debasing  to  both  ;  that  if  the  religious  power  rises  superior  to 
the  civil  power,  it  is  ruinous  to  the  State  ;  and  that  religious 
and  civil  rights  are  both  secure,  and  religion  and  liberty  go 
forward  together,  only  when  religion  and  the  State  are  sep- 
arate. And  in  all  this  there  was  demonstrated  by  every 
proof,  the  perfect  wisdom  and  absolute  justice  of  the  divine 
principle  enunciated  by  Jesus  Christ,  that  religion  and  the 
State  must  be  entirely  separate  —  that  to  Caesar  there  is  to 
be  rendered  only  that  which  is  Caesar's,  while  men  must  be 
left  free  to  render  to  God  that  which  is  God's,  according  to 
the  dictates  of  the  individual  conscience. 

"In  the  formation  of  the  government  and  in  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States,  the  triumph  of  the  principles  of 
Christianity  respecting  earthly  government,  was  complete. 
In  their  completeness,  and  by  the  directing  providence  of 
God,  these  divine  principles  were  thus  set  forth  for  an 
example  to  all  nations.  Yet  instead  of  these  principles 
having  been  maintained  in  their  integrity  as  established  by 
the  fathers  of  the  New  Republic,  there  has  been  allowed  or 
effected  by  those  who  came  after,  a  steady  encroachment, 
little  by  little,  of  religion  upon  the  State.  Each  successive 
encroachment  has  been  made,  by  the  precedent,  only  a 
stepping  stone  to  further  encroachment,  until  now  the 
demand  is  openly,  persistently,  and  even  powerfully  made, 
that  the  government  shall  formally  and  officially  abandon 
this  fundamental  and  characteristic  principle,  and  commit 
itself  to  the  principle  of  religious  legislation  —  legislation  in 
behalf  of  the  name  and  institutions  of  a  professed  Chris- 
tianity—  which  is  only  to  commit  itself  to  the  principles  of 
the  papacy. 


756  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

"If  in  the  discussions  preliminary  to  the  establishment 
of  this  principle  as  part  of  the  supreme  law  of  this  nation, 
Madison  could  say  that,  '  If  with  the  salutary  effects  of  this 
system  under  our  own  eyes,  we  begin  to  contract  the  bounds 
of  religious  freedom,  we  know  no  name  which  will  too 
severely  reproach  our  folly,'1  how  much  more  emphatically 
can  the  same  thing  be  said  upon  the  experience  of  more 
than  a  hundred  years  !  If  in  the  face  of  all  history  on  one 
hand,  and  this  more  than  a  hundred  years  of  experience  on 
the  other,  such  a  thing  should  be  done,  we  may  not  only  ask, 
What  name  would  too  severely  reproach  our  folly?  but, 
What  punishment  would  be  too  severe  for  our  wickedness  ? 
If  such  a  thing  should  be  done,  what  wonder  should  there  be 
if  this  national  apostasy  should  be  the  signal  of  national 
ruin  f 

"And  has  not  the  movement  to  accomplish  this  purpose 
attained  sufficient  prominence  to  make  the  prospect  of  its 
success  worthy  the  serious  consideration  of  every  soul  who 
has  any  love  for  the  genuine  principles  of  the  religion  of 
Jesus  Christ,  or  any  regard  for  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  government  of  the  United  States,  or  any  respect  for 
the  rights  of  mankind  ?  If  that  which  has  already  been 
accomplished  in  this  direction  is  not  sufficient  to  arouse 
every  such  person  to  the  most  active  and  earnest  diligence 
in  defense  of  the  divine  heritage  bestowed  upon  the  world 
by  Jesus  Christ  and  bequeathed  to  us  by  our  Revolutionary 
fathers,  what  more  can  be  required  to  do  it  ? 

"  We  have  seen  the  rise,  the  rapid  growth,  and  the  aim, 
both  immediate  and  ultimate,  of  the  strongest  religious  com- 
bination that  could  possibly  be  formed  in  the  United  States. 
And  it  is  evident  that  the  combination  will  leave  no  neces- 
sary means  unemployed  to  accomplish  its  purpose.  And, 
indeed,  having  already  the  sanction  of  such  an  array  of  relig- 
ious precedents  on  the  part  of  the  government,  and  the 

^age  691,  this  book. 


REACTION  IN  INTERESTS    OF    THE  PAPACY.       757 

favor,  from  powerful  sources,  of  so  many  distinct  pieces  of 
religious  legislation,  what  is  to  hinder  the  complete  success 
of  the  movement  in  its  one  chief  aim  ? 

"  It  is  evident  that  even  now  all  that  remains  is  to  bring 
the  question  to  an  issue  where  votes  shall  decide.  If  it  shall 
be  brought  to  a  vote  in  Congress  first,  the  probabilities  are 
altogether  in  favor  of  its  being  carried.  During  the  Fifty- 
first  Congress,  the  New  York  Independent  attempted  a  sort 
of  census  of  the  Sunday  standing  of  members.  There  was 
not  a  majority  of  the  members  who  replied,  but  the  great 
majority^  of  those  who  did  reply  expressed  themselves  in  fa- 
vor of  the  governmental  recognition  of  Sunday  sacredness 
by  closing  the  coming  World's  Fair  on  Sunday. 

"  But  even  though  a  vote  should  fail  in  a  Congress 
already  elected,  and  the  question  should  be  made  the  issue 
in  a  congressional  election,  still  the  probabilities  are  that  the 
religious  combination  could  secure  enough  members  to  carry 
their  scheme  in  some  way  to  a  successful  issue.  And  if  the 
combination  can  succeed  in  causing  the  government  to  bend 
to  their  will  in  a  single  point,  everything  else  that  they  con- 
template will  follow.  If  the  first  step  be  taken,  the  last 
step  is  then  as  certainly  taken  ;  for  the  last  step  is  in  the 
first. 


"The  government  of  the  United  States  is  the  only  one 
that  has  ever  been  on  earth,  which,  by  its  fundamental  prin- 
ciples and  its  supreme  law,  has  been  in  harmony  with  the 
word  of  God  as  it  respects  earthly  government  ;  the  only  one 
that  was  ever  pledged  to  a  distinct  and  positive  separation 
from  religion  ;  and  therefore  the  only  government  since  the 
papacy  arose,  that  was  ever  fully  separated  from  the  princi- 
ples of  the  papacy.  Against  this  the  papacy  and  those  who 
held  to  her  principles,  have  always  protested.  They  have 
always  insisted  that  it  was  an  experiment  that  never  could 


758  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

be  made  to  succeed.  Yet  in  spite  of  it  all  and  in  the  face 
of  the  hoary  principles  of  the  mother  of  harlots,  this  nation 
in  liberty  and  enlightenment  lias  been  the  admiration  of  all 
nations,  and  in  progress  has  been  the  wonder  of  the  world. 
And  the  influence  which  by  these  things,  and  above  all  by 
its  absolutely  free  exercise  of  religious  right,  this  govern- 
ment has  exerted  upon  other  nations,  has  surely  and  steadily 
weakened  the  hold  of  the  papal  principles  upon  them,  till 
even  Spain,  the  home  of  the  Inquisition,  has  been  led  to 
grant  toleration. 

"Now  if  this  government  of  such  glorious  principles, 
shall  be  subverted,  and  shall  be  joined  to  the  religion  and 
put  under  the  feet  of  an  imperious  hierarchy,  and  its  hitherto 
splendid  powers  shall  be  prostituted  to  the  vile  uses  of  re- 
ligious oppression  and  persecution,  the  reactionary  influence 
upon  the  other  nations  will  be  such  as  to  lift  the  papacy  to 
such  a  position  of  prominence  and  power  as  it  never  before 
possessed  ;  as  much  greater  than  that  which  it  possessed  in 
the  midnight  of  the  Dark  Ages,  as  the  world  is  larger  now 
than  it  was  then.  In  short,  this  reaction  would  lift  the  pa- 
pacy to  the  place  where  the  prophecy  would  be  fulfilled  that, 
'Power  was  given  him  over  all  kindreds  and  tongues  and 
nations.'  Rev.  xiii,  7. 

"As  surely  as  this  thing  shall  ever  be  done,  so  surely 
will  there  be  universal  persecution.  The  exaltation  of  the 
day  of  the  sun  has  been  the  greatest  ambition  of  the  spirit  of 
the  papacy  from  its  earliest  manifestation.  And  any  one 
who  will  pause  and  think  a  little,  will  clearly  see  that  the 
only  religious  thing  there  is,  in  the  observance  of  which  all 
nations  agree  is  THE  SUNDAY.  They  all  likewise  agree  that 
its  observance  should  be  enforced  by  law.  Switzerland, 
Germany,  Austria,  Russia,  France,  Belgium,  Holland,  Spain, 
Italy,  Roumania,  Scotland,  England,  the  United  States, 
Scandinavia,  Brazil  and  other  South  American  States,  Aus- 
tralia, and  even  Japan  —  Catholic,  heathen,  and  so-called 


HYPOCRISY  AND  RUIN  THE   CONSEQUENCE.        759 

Protestant  alike  —  all  agree  in  the  exaltation  of  Sunday  to 
the  highest  place  in  human  affairs,  and  in  compelling  all  to 
observe  it.  And  in  all  alike,  hatred  of  a  Christian's  observ- 
ance of  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord,  adds  intensity  to  the  zeal 
for  the  '  sacredness'  of  Sunday. 

"But,  we  repeat,  the  Sunday  is  the  institution  par  excel- 
lence of  the  papacy  —  that  which  'the  church'  sets  forth  as 
the  sign  of  her  authority.  The  keeping  of  Sunday  by  Prot- 
estants '  is  an  homage  they  pay  in  spite  of  themselves  to  the 
authority  of  the  Catholic  Church;'  so  says  'the  church,' 
and  Protestants  cannot  disprove  it.  And  when  the  nations 
exalt  Sunday  and  compel  its  observance,  they  thereby  cause 
men  to  honor,  obey,  and  do  homage  to  the  papacy ;  the 
'  man  of  sin '  is  made  once  more  the  fountain  of  authority 
and  the  source  of  doctrine  ;  all  men  are  compelled,  under 
pains  and  penalties,  to  recognize  it  as  such,  and  so,  '  All 
that  dwell  upon  the  earth  shall  worship  him,  whose  names 
are  not  written  in  the  book  of  life  of  the  Lamb  slain  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world.'  Rev.  xiii,  8. 

"And  further  saith  the  Scripture,  'I  beheld,  and  the 
same  horn  made  war  with  the  saints,  and  prevailed  against 
them  ;  until  the  Ancient  of  Days  came,  and  judgment  was 
given  to  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  ;  and  the  time  came 
that  the  saints  possessed  the  kingdom.'  Dan.  vii,  21,  22. 

"Of  course,  in  the  eyes  of  those  who  demand  such  legis- 
lation, and  even  many  others,  such  proceedings  would  not  be 
considered  persecution.  It  would  only  be  enforcing  the  law. 
But  no  State  has  any  right  either  to  make  or  to  enforce  any 
such  law.  Such  a  law  is  wrong  in  itself  ;  the  very  making 
of  it  is  wrong.  And  to  obey  such  a  law  is  wrong.  All  that 
any  persecution  has  ever  been,  was  only  the  enforcement  of 
the  law.8 

"  And  what  would  be  the  result?     Precisely  what  it  was 
before.     As  sure  as  the  movement  to  commit  the  govern- 
2  See  pages  162-164  of  this  book. 


760  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

ment  of  the  United  States  to  a  course  of  religious  legislation, 
shall  succeed,  so  surely  will  there  be  repeated  the  history  of 
Rome  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries. 

"First,  by  hypocrisy,  voluntary  and  enforced,  there  Will 
be  a  general  depravity,  described  by  inspiration  thus : 
'  This  know  also,  that  in  the  last  days  perilous  times  shall 
come.  For  men  shall  be  lovers  of  their  own  selves,  covet- 
ous, boasters,  proud,  blasphemers,  disobedient  to  parents, 
unthankful,  unholy.  Without  natural  affection,  truce-break- 
ers, false  accusers,  incontinent,  fierce,  despisers  of  those 
that  are  good.  Traitors,  heady,  high-minded,  lovers  of 
pleasures  more  than  lovers  of  God.  Having  a  form  of  godr 
liness,  but  denying  the  power  thereof  :  from  such  turn  away. 
.  .  .  But  evil  men  and  seducers  shall  wax  worse  and  worse, 
deceiving,  and  being  deceived.'  2  Tim.  iii,  1-5,  13. 

"Second,  As  before,  society  will  grow  so  utterly  corrupt 
that  there  will  be  no  remedy,  and  only  ruin  can  result.3 
The  principles,  the  proposals,  and  the  practices  of  this 
movement,  are  identical  with  those  which  characterized  that 
church  movement  in  the  fourth  century.  Two  things  that 
are  so  alike  in  the  making,  can  be  no  less  alike  when  they 
are  made.  And  two  things  that  are  so  alike  in  every  other 
respect,  cannot  possibly  be  any  less  alike  in  the  final  results. 
The  events  of  the  history  have  occurred  in  vain,  if  this 
is  not  the  lesson  which  they  teach,  and  the  warning  which 
they  give. 

"By  that  'mystic  symbol  of  legal  government,'  its  Great 
Seal,  the  Government  of  the  United  States  stands  pledged  to 
'A  new  order  of  things  —  JVovus  Ordo  Seclorum  /'  and 
by  this  same  symbol,  it  is  declared  that  '  God  Has  Favored 
the  Undertaking.'  That  God  has  favored  the  undertaking 
is  certain,  and  is  manifest  to  all  the  world. 

"Thus  God  has  made  the  New  Republic,  the  exemplar  to 
all  the  world,  of  the  true  governmental  principles.     To  this 
nation  God  has  committed  this  sacred  trust.     How  will  the 
8  See  pages  512-516,  519  of  this  book. 


a 


THE  ANSWER   HAS  BEEN  GIVEN.  761 

nation  acquit  itself  ?  how  will  the  nation  fulfill  this  divine 
obligation  ?  Will  it  maintain  the  high  position  which  God 
has  given  it  before  all  the  nations  ?  or  shall  it  be  brought 
down  from  its  high  estate,  be  shorn  of  its  power  and  its 
glory,  and,  bound  and  fettered,  be  led  a  captive  in  the  ruin- 
ous triumph  of  the  papacy  ?  Shall  the  new  order  of  things 
prevail  ?  or  shall  the  old  order  be  restored  ? 

"  These  are  the  living  questions  of  the  hour.  The  fate  of 
the  nation  and  of  the  world,  depends  upon  the  answer.  The 
issue  out  of  which  the  answer  must  come,  even  now  hangs 
in  the  political  balance.  The  answer  itself  even  now  trem- 
bles upon  the  tongue  of  time. 

"AND  WHAT  SHALL  THE  ANSWER  BE?" 

Such  were  the  concluding  observations  and  inquiry  of  this 
book  as  it  originally  went  forth  in  1891.  And  before  a  year 
had  passed,  the  probability  that  The  Great  Conspiracy  would 
succeed  had  been  turned  into  accomplished  fact ;  the 
answer  to  the  above  questions  have  been  given  in  distinct 
tones  by  all  three  departments  of  the  government  —  the 
judiciary,  the  legislative,  and  the  executive.  And  the  answer 
was  and  is  that,  The  New  Order  of  Things  should  not  con- 
tinue ;  but  that  the  Old  Order  of  Things  shall  be  restored, 
and  the  principles  of  the  papacy,  and  in  that  the  papacy 
itself,  shall  be  triumphant. 

The  first  phase  of  this  answer  came  from  an  unexpected 
source,  and  in  an  unexpected  way  —  from  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  and  in  a  wholly  voluntary  and  an  un- 
called-for way. 

The  said  decision  came  forth  in  this  way  :  In  1887  Con- 
gress enacted  a  law  forbidding  any  alien  to  come  to  this 
country  under  contract  to  perform  labor  or  service  of  any 
kind.  The  reason  of  that  law  was  that  large  contractors  and 
corporations  in  the  United  States,  would  send  agents  to 
Europe  to  employ  the  lowest  of  the  people  whom  they  could 
get,  to  come  over  and  work.  They  would  pay  their  expenses 


762  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

over,  and  because  of  this,  require  them  to  work  at  so  much 
the  smaller  wages  after  they  arrived.  This  was  depreciating 
the  price  that  Americans  should  receive  for  their  labor,  and 
therefore  Congress  enacted  a  law  as  follows  :  — 

"Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  from  and  after  the  passage 
of  this  act  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  company,  partnership,  or 
corporation,  in  any  manner  whatsoever,  to  prepay  the  transportation,  or 
in  any  way  assist  or  encourage  the  importation  or  migration  of  any  alien 
or  aliens,  any  foreigner  or  foreigners,  into  the  United  States,  its  Terri- 
tories, or  the  District  of  Columbia,  under  contract  or  agreement,  parol  or 
special,  expressed  or  implied,  made  previous  to  the  importation  or  migra- 
tion of  such  alien  or  aliens,  foreigner  or  foreigners,  to  perform  labor  or 
service  of  any  kind  in  the  United  States,  its  Territories,  or  the  District  of 
Columbia." 

Trinity  Church  corporation,  in  New  York  City,  hired  a 
preacher  in  England  to  come  over  here  and  preach  for  them. 
They  contracted  with  him  before  he  came.  He  was  an  alien, 
and  came  over  under  contract  to  perform  service  for  that 
church.  The  United  States  District  Attorney  entered  suit 
against  the  church  for  violating  this  law.  The  United  States 
Circuit  Court  decided  that  the  church  was  guilty,  and  ren- 
dered judgment  accordingly.  An  appeal  was  taken  to  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  upon  writ  of  error. 

The  Supreme  Court  reversed  the  decision,  first  upon  the 
correct  and  well-established  principle  that  "the  intent  of 
the  lawmaker  is  the  law."  The  court  quoted  directly  from  the 
reports  of  the  Senate  Committee  and  the  House  Committee 
who  had  the  bill  in  charge  when  it  was  put  through  Con- 
gress ;  and  these  both  said  in  express  terms  that  the  term 
"'laborer,''  or  "labor  or  service,"  used  in  the  statute,  was 
intended  to  mean  only  manual  labor  or  service,  and  not 
professional  service  of  any  kind.  For  instance,  the  Senate 
Committee  said  :  - 

"  The  committee  report  the  bill  back  without  amendment,  although 
there  are  certain  features  thereof  which  might  well  be  changed  or  modi- 
fied, in  the  hope  that  the  bill  may  not  fail'of  passage  during  the  present 


FEBRUARY  29,  1892.  763 

session.  Especially  would  the  committee  have  otherwise  recommended 
amendments,  substituting  for  the  expression,  'labor  and  service,'  when- 
ever it  occurs  in  the  body  of  the  bill,  the  words,  'manual  labor'  or 
'manual  service,'  as  sufficiently  broad  to  accomplish  the  purposes  of  the 
bill,  and  that  such  amendments  would  remove  objections  which  a  sharp 
and  perhaps  unfriendly  criticism  may  urge  to  the  proposed  legislation. 
The  committee,  however,  believing  that  the  bill  in  its  present  form  will  be 
construed  as  including  only  those  whose  labor  or  service  is  manual  in 
character,  and  being  very  desirous  that  the  bill  become  a  law  before  the 
adjournment,  have  reported  the  bill  without  change.  (6059,  Congres- 
sional Record,  48th  Congress.)" 

Such  was  the  plainly  declared  intent  of  the  law,  by 
those  who  made  it,  arid  at  the  time  of  the  making  of  it,  there 
was  nothing  left  for  the  Supreme  Court  to  do  but  to  give 
effect  to  the  law  as  it  was  intended,  by  reversing  the  decision 
of  the  court  below.  And  in  all  reason  when  the  court  had 
thus  made  plain  the  intent  of  the  law,  this  was  all  that  was 
necessary  to  the  decision  of  the  case. 

But  instead  of  stopping  with  this  that  was  all-sufficient, 
the  court  took  up  a  line  of  reasoning  (?)  by  which  it  would 
reach  the  same  point  from  another  direction,  and  then  as  the 
result  of  each  and  of  both,  decided  what  the  true  intent  of 
the  law  was  and  reversed  the  decision  of  the  lower  court  ac- 
cordingly. And  never  was  the  aptness  and  wisdom  of  that 
piece  of  advice  which  Abraham  Lincoln  once  gave  to  a 
friend —  "  Never  say  what  you  need  not,  lest  you  be  obliged 
to  prove  what  you  cannot "-  —  more  completely  illustrated 
than  in  this  unnecessary  line  of  argument  which  was  pursued 
by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  this  decision 
of  February  29,  1892. 

The  court  unanimously  declares  that  "this  is  a  religious 
people,"  "a  religious  nation,"  and  even  "a  Christian  na- 
tion," and  that  such  is  "the  voice  of  the  entire  people."  In 
support  of  these  declarations  the  court  offers  considerable  ar- 
gument, which  will  be  noticed  presently.  But  the  first  thing 
to  be  noted  is  that  whether  the  court  supported  the  declara- 
tions with  considerable  argument  or  with  none  at  all,  it  had 


THE    CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

no  shadow  of  right  to  make  any  such  declarations.  By 
the  whole  history  of  the  making  of  the  Constitution,  by 
its  spirit,  and  by  its  very  letter,  the  government  of  the 
United  States,  and  therefore  the  Supreme  Court  as  a  co-or- 
dinate branch  of  the  government,  is  precluded  from  declaring 
or  arguing  in  favor  of  the  Christian  religion  or  any  religion 
whatever.  Let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  James  Madison,  in 
persuading  the  Virginia  Convention  to  ratify  the  Constititu- 
tion,  gave  the  assurance  that  "there  is  not  a  shadow  of  right 
in  the  general  government  to  intermeddle  with  religion.  Its 
least  interference  with  it  would  be  a  most  flagrant  usurpa- 
tion."' And  it  is  certain  that  in  the  declarations  made,  in 
the  argument  conducted,  in  the  citations  made,  and  in  the 
conclusion  reached,  in  this  decision,  the  Supreme  Court  did 
"intermeddle  with  religion;"  and  in  so  doing  did  that 
which  it  had  "  not  a  shadow  of  right"  to  do. 

The  first  words  of  the  Court  in  this  line  are  as  follows : — 

"But  beyond  all  these  matters,  no  purpose  of  action  against  religion 
can  be  imputed  to  any  legislation,  State  or  national,  because  this  is  a  re- 
ligious people.  This  is  historically  true.  From  the  discovery  of  this 
continent  to  the  present  hour,  there  is  a  single  voice  making  this 
affirmation." 

Every  citizen  of  the  United  States  knows  that  it  is  not 
true,  either  historically  or  otherwise,  that  this  is  a  religious 
people.  Not  even  a  majority  of  the  people  are  religious. 
There  is  not  a  single  city  in  the  United  States  in  which  the 
people  are  religious  —  no,  not  a  single  town  or  village. 

That  is  to  say,  this  was  so  up  to  the  time  of  the  rendering 
of  this  decision,  February  29,  1892  ;  since  that,  of  course 
the  people  are  religious  because  the  Supreme  Court  says  so. 
To  be  sure,  some  of  our  neighbors,  and  many  other  people 
whom  we  meet,  do  not  know  that  they  are  religious  people, 
as  they  have  never  chosen  to  be  so  and  do  not  profess  it  at 
all ;  but  all  that  makes  no  difference  ;  the  Supreme  Court  of 

*  Page  695  of  this  book. 


ARE  ALL    THE  PEOPLE   CHRISTIANS?  765 

the  United  States  lias  by  unanimous  decision  declared  that 
they  are  religious  people,  and  it  must  be  so  whether  they 
know  it  or  not.  Nor  is  this  all.  The  court  not  only  declares 
that  this  is  a  "religious  nation,"  but  that  it  is  a  "  Christian 
nation."  The  people,  therefore,  are  not  only  religious  but 
they  are  Christians  —  yes,  Jews,  infidels,  and  all.  For  is  not 
the  Supreme  Court  the  highest  judicial  authority  in  the 
United  States  ?  and  what  this  court  declares  to  be  the  law, 
is  n't  that  the  law  ?  and  when  this  court  lays  it  down  as  the 
supreme  law  —  as  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution  —  that  the 
people  are  religious,  and  are  Christians,  then  does  n't  that 
settle  the  question  ?  —  Not  at  all.  The  very  absurdity  of  the 
suggestion  only  demonstrates  that  the  court  can  have  nothing 
at  all  to  do  with  any  such  matters,  and  shows  how  completely 
the  court  transcended  its  powers  and  went  out  of  the  right 
way.  No  ;  men  are  not  made  religious  by  law,  nor  by 
judicial  decision,  nor  by  historical  precedents. 

The  statement  that  "from  the  discovery  of  this  continent 
to  the  present  hour  there  is  a  single  voice "  making  the 
affirmation  that  this  nation  is  a  religious  people,  is  equally 
wide  of  the  mark.  For  at  the  time  of  the  making  of  this 
national  government  there  was  a  new,  fresh  voice  heard 
contradicting  the  long,  dismal  monotone  of  the  ages,  and 
declaring  for  this  new  nation  that  it  "is  not  in  any  sense 
founded  upon  the  Christian  religion,"  and  that  it  can  never  of 
right  have  anything  to  do  with  religion  —  that  it  has  "not  a 
shadow  of  right  to  intermeddle  with  religion,"  and  that  "its 
least  interference  with  it  would  be  a  most  flagrant  usurpation. " 
And  this  voice  it  was  which  gave  rise  to  the  "new  order  of 
things  "for  this  country  and  for  the  world.  Why  did  not 
the  court  heed  this  voice  ? 

After  this  deliverance  the  court  proceeds  to  cite  historical 
evidences  to  prove  the  proposition  that  this  is  a  "religious 
people"  and  a  "Christian  nation."  The  first  is  as 
follows :  — 


766  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

"The  commission  to  Christopher  Columbus,  prior  to  his  sail  westward 
is  from  '  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  by  the  grace  of  God,  king  and  queen 
of  Castile,'  etc.,  and  recites  that,  'it  is  hoped  that  by  God's  assistance 
some  of  the  continents  and  islands  in  the  ocean  will  be  discovered,'  etc." 

What  religion  did  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  have  in  mind 
when  they  issued  that  document  ?  What  religion  did  they 
profess  ?  And  what  religion  did  they  possess,  too  ?  —  The 
Catholic  religion,  to  be  sure.  And  not  only  that,  it  was  the 
Catholic  religion  with  the  Inquisition  in  full  swing,  for  it 
was  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  who  established  the  Inquisition 
in  Spain  under  the  generalship  of  Torquemada,  and  who, 
because  Spain  was  a  "Christian  nation,"  sentenced  to  con- 
fiscation of  all  goods,  and  to  banishment,  every  Jew  who 
would  not  turn  Catholic.5  And  by  virtue  of  such  religious 
activity  as  this,  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  fairly  earned  as  an 
everlasting  reward,  and  by  way  of  pre-eminence,  the  title  of 
"THE  CATHOLICS."  And  this  is  the  first  piece  of 
"  historical "  authority  by  which  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  adjudges  American  citizens  "  to  be  a  religious 
people,"  and  by  which  that  court  decides  that  this  is  a 
"  Christian  nation." 

Now  that  is  quoted  to  prove  that  this  is  a  "religious  peo- 
ple "  and  a  "  Christian  nation  ;  "  and  it  is  declared  that  this 
language  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  and  the  language  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  "have  one  meaning." 

Then  in  view  of  that  quotation  and  this  decision,  should 
it  be  wondered  at  if  the  Catholic  Church  should  claim  that 
this  is  so  indeed,  and  should  demand  favors  from  the  gov- 
ernment as  such?  Everybody  knows  that  the  Catholic 
Church  already  is  not  slow  to  take  part  in  politica.1  ques- 
tions, to  interfere  with  the  government,  and  to  have  the  gov- 
ernment recognize  the  Catholic  Church  and  give  it  every 


5  This   sentence   was   inflicted   too,    after  the   commission    to    Christopher 
Columbus  under  which  he  discovered  this  "  Christian  nation ." 


THE   PURPOSES   OF    THE  BRITISH  SOVEREIGNS.     ^67 

year  from  the  public  treasury  nearly  four  hundred  thousand 
dollars  of  the  money  of  all  the  people.  The  people  know 
that  this  is  already  the  case.  And  now,  when  this  Catholic 
document  is  cited  by  the  Supreme  Court  to  prove  this  a 
Christian  nation ;  and  when  that  court  declares  that  .this 
document  and  the  Constitution  have  one  meaning  ;  should  it 
be  thought  strange  if  the  Catholic  Church  should  claim  that 
that  is  correct,  and  act  upon  it  ? 

However  it  is  not  denominational  or  "sectarian  "  Chris- 
tianity that  the  court  proposes  to  recognize  as  the  national 
religion  here,  but  simply  "Christianity,  general  Christian- 
ity." Accordingly,  British  documents  are  next  quoted  which 
designate  "the  true  Christian  faith1'  as  professed  in  the 
church  of  England  in  colonial  times.  And  here  is  the  quo- 
tation :  - 

"The  first  colonial  grant,  that~made  to  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  in  1584, 
was  from  '  Elizabeth,  by  the  grace  of  God ;  of  England,  Fraunce,  and 
Ireland,  queene,  Defender  of  the  Faith,'  etc.;  and  the  grant  authorized 
him  to  enact  statutes  for  the  government  of  the  proposed  colony  ; 
Provided,  That,  '  they  be  not  against  the  true  Christian  faith  now  pro- 
fessed in  the  Church  of  England.'6  .  .  .  Language  of  a  similar  import 
may  be  found  in  the  subsequent  charters,  .  .  .  and  the  same  is-true  of 
the  various  charters  granted  to  other  colonies.  In  language  more  or  less 
emphatic,  is  the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religon  declared  to  be 
one  of  the  purposes  of  the  grant."7 

It  is  true  that  "the  establishment  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion was  one  of  the  purposes"  of  all  these  grants.  But  are  the 
American  people  still  bound  by  the  purposes  and  intentions 


6  Turu  to  pages  584,  585,  and  593  of  this  book  and  it  will  be  seen  what  was 
the    "  true   Christian   faith "    professed  in  the   Church   of   England   in  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time. 

7  It   may    very    properly    be    noted  here,    in     passing,    that   this  and  the 
previous  quotation,  just  as  certainly  prove  the  divine  right  of  rulers  in  this 
country,  as  they  prove  that  this  is  "  a  religious  people  "  or  "  a  Christian  nation." 
And  this  is  the  logic  of  the  discussion,  too  ;  for  it  is  plainly  declared  that  these 
documents  and  the  Constitution  have  all  one  language  and  "  one  meaning." 

57 


768  THE    CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS 

of  Queen  Elizabeth  and  her  British  successors  ?  Does  Britain 
still  rule  America,  that  the  intent  and  purposes  of  British 
sovereigns  shall  be  held  binding  upon  the  American  people? 
Nay,  nay.  After  all  these  documents  were  issued  there  was 
the  American  Revolution  and  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence, by  which  it  was  both  declared  and  demonstrated  that 
these  Colonies  are  and  of  right  ought  to  be  free  and  inde- 
pendent States  —  free  and  independent  of  British  rule,  and 
the  intents  and  purposes  of  British  sovereigns  in  all  things, 
religious  as  well  as  civil.8 

It  is  true  that  "  the  establishment  of  the  Christian  relig- 
ion was  one  of  the  purposes"  of  these  grants.  But  shall  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  count  for  nothing,  when 
it  positively  prohibits  any  religious  test,  and  any  establish- 
ment of  religion  of  any  kind  ?  Shall  the  supreme  law  of 
this  nation  count  for  nothing  in  its  solemn  declaration  that 
"the  government  of  the  United  States  is  not  in  any  sense 
founded  on  the  Christian  religion "  ?  Has  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  the  right  to  supplant  the  supreme 
law  of  this  land  with  the  intents  and  purposes  of  the 
sovereigns  of  England  ?  Is  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  the  interpreter  of  the  supreme  law  of  the  United 
States  ?  or  is  it  the  interpreter  of  the  intents  and  purposes  of 
the  sovereigns  of  England,  France,  and  Ireland,  "Defenders 
of  the  Faith  "  ? 

It  is  true  that  "  the  establishment  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion was  one  of  the  purposes "  of  these  grants ;  and  that 
purpose  was  accomplished  in  the  colonies  settled  under  those 
grants.  But  though  all  this  be  true,  what  possible  bearing 
can  that  rightly  have  on  any  question  under  the  Constitution 
and  laws  of  the  national  government?  The  national  system 
was  not  intended  to  be  a  continuation  of  the  colonial  system  ; 
on  the  contrary,  it  was  intended  to  be  distinct  from  both  the 
colonial  and  State  systems.  And  the  chief,  the  very  funda- 
mental, distinction  that  the  national  system  was  intended  to 
8  See  page  683  of  this  book. 


LOGICAL  SUBSTANCE   OF   THE  ARGUMENT. 

have  from  both  the  others  was  in  its  complete  separation 
from  every  idea  of  an  establishment  of  religion. 

And  though  it  be  true  that  all  the  colonies  except 
Rhode  Island  had  establishments  of"  the  Christian  religion" 
in  pursuance  of  the  purpose  of  these  British  grants  ;  and 
though  all  the  States  except  Rhode  Island  and  Virginia 
had  these  same  establishments  of  "  the  Christian  religion  " 
when  the  national  system  was  organized  ;  yet  this  had  no 
bearing  whatever  upon  the  national  system  except  to  make 
all.  the  more  emphatic  its  total  separation  from  them  all, 
and  from  every  conception  of  an  establishment  of  "the 
Christian  religion." 

Let  us  reduce  to  the  form  of  a  short  and  direct  argument 
this  reasoning  of  the  court.  The  proposition  to  be  proved 
is,  "this  is  a  Christian  nation."  The  leading  member  is, 
"the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion  was  one  of  the 
purposes  "  of  the  British  grants  here.  We  have  then  the  prin- 
cipal statement  and  the  conclusion.  But  this  is  not  enough  ; 
we  must  know  how  the  conclusion  follows  from  the  leading 
statement.  So  far  the  argument  stands  merely  thus  :  — 

(a)  "The  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion  was 
one  of  the  purposes  of  the  British  grants  in  America." 

(5)   "This  is  a  Christian  nation." 

But  this  will  never  do  ;  there  is  a  destructive  hiatus  be- 
tween the  two  statements.  This  blank  must  be  tilled,  or  else 
there  is  a  total  absence  of  reasoning,  and  the  conclusion  is 
nothing.  With  what,  then,  shall  this  blank  be  tilled  ?  It 
could  be  filled  thus  :  — 

(a)  "The   establishment  of  the   Christian   religion  was 
one  of  the  purposes  of  the  British  grants  in  America." 

(b)  "America  is  subject  to  British  sovereignty." 

(c)  Consequently,  in  the  meaning  of  the  law,    "this  is  a 
Christian  nation." 

This  would  complete  the  formula,  would  give  the  conlu- 
sion  something  to  rest  upon,  and  would  connect  it  with  the 


770  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

leading  statement.  But  the  difficulty  with  it  is  that  it  is  not 
true.  It  is  not  only  contrary  to  the  history  and  the  experi- 
ence of  the  nations  concerned,  but  it  is  contrary  to  the 
argument  of  the  court  itself ;  for  the  court,  in  its  argument, 
does  recognize  and  name  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
and  the  national  Constitution.  This  thought  then  is  not 
allowable  in  the  argument. 

What  thought,  then,  will  fit  the  place  and  make  the  for- 
mula complete?  There  is  one,  and  only  one  possible 
thought,  that  can  fit  the  place  and  make  the  connection  be- 
tween the  court's  premise  and  its  conclusion.  That  thought 
is  given  by  the  court  itself  as  the  turning-point,  and  is  indeed, 
the  pivot  —  the  very  crucial  test  —  of  the  argument  of  the 
court.  Here  is  the  statement  in  the  words  of  the  court :  — 

(a)  "The  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion  is  de- 
clared to  be  one  of  the  purposes  of  the  [British]  grants  [in 
America]." 

(£)  "  This  declaration  and  the  national  Constitution  have 
one  language  and  '  one  meaning.' ' 

(c)  Consequently,  "  this  is  a  Christian  nation." 

This  and  this  alone  is  the  course  of  reasoning  by  which 
the  court  reaches  its  conclusion  that  "  this  is  a  Christian  na- 
tion." This  is  the  thought,  and  indeed  those  are  the  words 
of  the  court.  The  thing  is  accomplished  solely  by  making 
the  language  of  the  Constitution  bear  "one  meaning"  with 
these  quoted  declarations  whose  purpose  was  plainly  "the 
establishment  of  the  Christian  religion." 

But  some  may  say,  This  formula  encounters  the  same 
difficulty  as  did  the  other  one  ;  viz.,  it  is  not  true,  and  is 
contrary  to  all  the  history  and  experience  of  the  nation  in 
the  times  of  the  making  of  the  Constitution.  It  is  true  that 


9  Immediately  after  quoting  the  First  Amendment  to  the  Constitution,  along 
with  all  these  other  documents,  the  court's  words  are  these :  — 

"  There  is  no  dissonance  in  these  declarations.  There  is  a  universal  language 
pervading  them  all,  having  one  meaning.  They  affirm  and  reaffirm  that  this  is 
a  religious  nation." 


THE  DECISIVE  POINT.  771 

the  connecting  statement  between  the  premise  and  the  con- 
clusion in  this  latter  formula  is,  in  itself,  as  false  as  is  that 
one  in  the  former.  It  is  true  that  the  Constitution  was  never 
intended  to  bear  any  such  meaning  as  is  here  given  to  it  in 
harmony  with  the  declarations  quoted.  It  was  both  intended 
and  declared  to  bear  a  meaning  directly  the  opposite  of  that 
which  these  declarations  bear.  And  if  any  other  person, 
persons,  or  tribunal,  on  earth  (except  all  the  people)  had 
said  that  such  is  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  it  would 
have  amounted  to  nothing.  Such  a  statement  made  by  the 
Supreme  Court,  however,  does  amount  to  something.  And — 

HERE    IS    THE    DECISIVE    POINT. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  is  constitution- 
ally authorized  to  interpret,  and  declare  the  meaning  of,  the 
Constitution.  Whatever  the  Supreme  Court  says  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Constitution  is,  that  is  legally  and  constitutionally 
its  meaning  so  long  as  said  decision  stands.  The  meaning 
which  the  court  gives  to  the  Constitution  may  be  utterly 
false,  as  in  the  Dred  Scott  decision  and  in  this  one,  but  that 
matters  nothing ;  the  false  meaning  stands  as  firmly  as 
though  it  were  true,  until  the  decision  is  reversed  either  by 
the  Supreme  Court  itself,  or  by  the  higher  court — the  people 
—  as  was  done  in  the  matter  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  of 
which  this  decision  now  under  consideration  is  a  complete 
parallel. 

Such  then  is  indisputably  the  meaning  which  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States  has  given  to  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  —  a  meaning  the  purpose  of  which 
is  "the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion."  This  is  a 
meaning  which  by  every  particle  of  evidence  derivable  from 
the  makers  and  the  making  of  the  Constitution  is  demon- 
strated to  be  directly  the  reverse  of  that  which  it  was  in- 
tended to  bear  and  which  it  did  bear  while  the  makers  of  it 
lived.  Therefore  as  certainly  as  logic  is  logic,  and  truth  is 
truth,  it  is  demonstrated  that  in  this  decision  the  Supreme 


772  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

Court  of  the  United  States  has  subverted  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  in  its  essential  meaning  as  regards  the 
Christian  religion  or  the  establishment  thereof. 

Nor  was  the  court  content  with  a  little.  These  declara- 
tions of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  Elizabeth,  James  I,  et  al., 
were  not  sufficient  to  satisfiy  the  zeal  of  the  court  in  behalf 
of  "Christianity,  general  Christianity,"  as  the  established 
and  national  religion  here  ;  but  it  must  needs  heap  upon 
these  fifteen  more,  from  different  sources,  to  the  same  pur- 
pose. Having  extracted  the  logical  substance  of  the  court's 
argument  throughout,  in  the  foregoing  analysis,  it  will  not 
be  necessary  for  us  to  apply  the  set  formula  to  each  citation 
in  all  the  long  list.  This  the  reader  can  readily  enough  do 
in  his  own  mind.  We  shall,  however,  present  all  of  the 
court's  quotations  and  its  application  of  them,  with  such 
further  remarks  as  may  be  pertinent. 

Next  following  the  citations  from  Ferdinand  and  Isa- 
bella, Elizabeth,  and  the  others  of  Britain,  the  court  sets 
forth  documents  of  the  New  England  Puritans  which  also 
plainly  declare  that  "the  establishment  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion was  one  of  the  purposes"  of  their  settlement  in  the 
land.  Here  is  the  language  of  the  court  and  of  the  Puri- 
tans :  — 

"The  celebrated  compact  made  by  the  Pilgrims  in  the  'Mayflower,' 
1620,  recites:  'Having  undertaken  for  the  glory  of  God  and  Advance- 
ment of  the  Christian  faith,  and  the  honor  of  our  King  and  Country,  a 
voyage  to  plant  the  first  colony  in  the  northern  parts  of  Virginia ;  Do  by 
these  Presents,  solemnly  and  mutually,  in  the  Presence  of  God  and  one 
another,  covenant  and  combine  ourselves  together  into  a  civil  Body 
Politick,  for  our  better  Ordering  and  Preservation,  and  Furtherance  of 
the  Ends  aforesaid.' 

"The  fundamental  orders  of  Connecticut,  under  which  a  provisional 
government  was  instituted  in  1638-1639,  commence  with  this  declara- 
tion:— 

"  'Forasmuch  as  it  hath  pleased  the  Almighty  God  by  the  wise  dis- 
pensation of  his  diuyne  pruidence  so  to  order  and  dispose  of  things  that 
we  the  inhabitants  and  residents  of  Windsor,  Hartford,  and  Wethersfield 


"CONECTECOTTE"  AND  PENNSYLVANIA.  773 

are  now  cohabiting  and  dwelling  in  and  upon  the  River  Conectecotte 
and  the  Lands  thereunto  adioyneing  ;  and  well  knowing  where  a  people 
are  gathered  together,  the  word  of  God  requires  that  to  mayntayne  the 
peace  and  vnion  of  such  a  people  there  should  be  an  orderly  and  decent 
Government  established  according  to  God,  to  order  and  dispose  of  the 
affayres  of  the  people  at  all  seasons  as  occasion  shall  require  ;  doe  there- 
fore assotiate  and  conioyne  ourselves  to  be  as  one  publike  State  or  Com- 
onwelth  ;  and  doe,  for  ourselves  and  our  successors  and  such  as  shall  be 
adioyned  to  vs  att  any  tyme  hereafter,  enter  into  Combination  and  Con- 
federation togather,  to  mayutayne  and  presearue  the  liberty  and  purity 
of  the  gospell  of  our  Lord  Jesus  wch  we  now  prfesse,  as  also  the  disci- 
plyne  of  the  churches,  wch  according  to  the  truth  of  the  said  gospell  is 
now  practised  amongst  us.'" 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  in  this  connection,  that  by  this 
"historical"  citation,  the  Supreme  Court  just  as  certainly 
justifies  the  employment  of  the  "civil  body  politick"  for  the 
maintenance  of  "the  disciplyne  of  the  churches,"  as  by  this 
and  the  previous  ones  it  establishes  the  Christian  religion  as 
the  religion  of  this  nation.  For  it  was  just  as  much  and  as 
directly  the  intention  of  those  people  to  maintain  the  disci- 
pline of  the  churches,  as  it  was  to  "preserve  the  liberty  and 
purity  of  the  gospel  then  practiced  "  among  them.  Indeed, 
it  was  only  by  maintaining  the  discipline  of  the  churches 
that  they  expected  to  preserve  "the  liberty  and  purity  of  the 
gospell "  as  there  and  then  practiced.  All  their  history 
shows  that  they  never  thought,  nor  made  any  pretensions,  of 
doing  it  in  any  other  way.  And  in  fact,  order  number  four 
of  these  very  "fundamental  orders"  required  that  the  gov- 
ernor of  that  "publike  State  or  Comonwelth  "  should  "be 
always  a  member  of  some  approved  congregation,"  and 
should  take  an  oath  that  he  would  "further  the  execution  of 
justice  according  to  the  rule  of  God's  word  ;  so  help  me  God 
in  .the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  10 

And  we  know  and  have  abundantly  shown  that  the  main- 
tenance of  the  discipline  of  the  churches  by  the  power  of 

10  See  pages  602-604,  608  aud  620-621  of  tbis  book. 


774  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

"the  civil  Body  Politick"  is  precisely  what  the  churches  of 
the  United  States  design  to  accomplish  through  the  enforce- 
ment of  national  Sunday  laws.  This  is  what  is  done  always 
in  the  enforcement  of  Sunday  laws  whether  State  or  national. 
And  all  this  purpose,  the  Supreme  Court  fully  sanctions  and 
justifies  in  its  (mis)interpretation  of  the  national  Constitution, 
when  it  declares  that  the  language  of  these  "fundamental 
orders  of  Connecticut "  and  the  language  of  the  national 
Constitution  is  "  one  language  "  "  having  one  meaning." 
The  court  proceeds  :  — 

"Iii  the  charter  of  privileges  granted  by  William  Penn  to  the  province 
of  Pennsylvania,  in  1701,  it  is  recited:  'Because  no  People  can  be  truly 
happy,  though  under  the  greatest  Enjoyment  of  Civil  Liberties,  if  abridged 
of  the  Freedom  of  their  Consciences,  as  to  their  Religious  Profession  and 
Worship  ;  And  Almighty  God  being  the  only  Lord  of  Conscience,  Father 
of  Lights  and  Spirits  ;  and  the  Author  as  well  as  Object  of  all  divine 
Knowledge,  Faith  and  Worship,  who  only  doth  enlighten  the  Minds,  and 
persuade  and  convince  the  Understandings  of  People,  I  do  hereby  grant 
and  declare,'  etc." 

Yes.  and  the  same  document  provided  that  in  order  to 
"be  capable  to  serve  the  government  in  any  capacity" 
a  person  must  "  also  profess  to  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  the 
Saviour  of  the  world."  And  according  to  the  same  docu- 
ment, in  order  to  be  assured  that  "he  should  in  no  ways 
be  molested,"  etc.,  a  person  living  in  that  province  was  re- 
quired to  "confess  and  acknowledge  the  only  Almighty  and 
Eternal  God  to  be  Creator,  Upholder,  and  Ruler  of  the 
world." 

Still  citing  proof  that  this  is  a  Christian  nation,  the  court 
continues  in  the  following  queer  fashion  :  — 

"Coming  nearer  to  the  present  time,  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
recognizes  the  presence  of  the  Divine  in  human  affairs  in  these  words  : 
'We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident,  that  all  men  are  created  equal, 
that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  unalienable  Rights, 
that  among  these  are  Life,  Liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  Happiness.'  '  We, 
therefore,  the  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  America,  in  General 


PERVERSION  OF    THE  DECLARATION.  Y75 

Congress  Assembled,  appealing  to  the  Supreme  Judge  of  the  world  for 
the  rectitude  of  our  intentions,  do,  in  the  Name  and  by  Authority  of 
the  good  People  of  these  Colonies,  solemnly  publish  and  declare,'  etc. : 
'And  for  the  support  of  this  Declaration,  with  a  firm  reliance  on  Divine 
Providence,  we  mutually  pledge  to  each  other  our  Lives,  our  Fortunes, 
and  our  sacred  Honor.'" 

It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence does  recognize  the  presence  of  the  Divine  in  human 
affairs.  But  it  is  a  hazardous  piece  of  logic  to  conclude  from 
this  that  "  this  is  a  Christian  nation."  For  what  nation  has 
there  ever  been  on  earth  that  did  not  recognize  the  presence 
of  the  Divine  in  human  affairs  ?  But  it  would  be  rather  risky 
to  conclude  from  this  that  all  nations  have  been  and  are 
"  Christian 'nations." 

But,  it  may  be  said,  This  recognizes  the  "  Creator,"  and 
"the  Supreme  Judge  of  the  world,"  as  well  as  "Divine 
Providence."  Yes,  that  is  true,  too.  And  so  do  the  Turks, 
the  Arabs,  the  Hindoos,  and  others  ;  but  that  would 
hardly  justify  the  Supreme  Court  or  anybody  else  in  con- 
cluding and  officially  declaring  that  Turkey,  Arabia,  and 
Hindoostan,  are  Christian  nations. 

But  it  may  still  be  said  that  those  who  made  this  Declara- 
tion used  these  expressions  with  none  other  than  the  God 
of  Christianity  in  mind.  This  may  or  may  not  be  true,  ac- 
cording to  the  way  of  thinking  of  the  respective  individuals 
who  signed  or  espoused  the  Declaration.11  But  whatever 
these  expressions  may  have  meant  to  those  who  used  them 
at  the  time,  it  is  certain  that  they  did  not  mean  what  the  Su- 
preme Court  has  here  made  them  mean.  Of  this  we  have 
the  most  positive  evidence. 


11  Thomas  Paine,  though  not  a  signer  of  the  Declaration,  had  no  small  part 
in  bringing  it  about,  and  it  is  certain  that  he  did  most  heartily  support  it.  And 
it  is  evident  enough  that  he  did  not  use  these  terms  with  reference  to  Chris- 
tianity, nor  with  the  intention  to  establish  "  a  Christian  nation  "  here.  Ethan 
Allen,  the  Green  Mountain  hero,  was  another,  and  there  were  thousands  oi 
others. 


770  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

Thomas  Jefferson  was  the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence, and  from  that  day  and  forward  he  exerted  all  his 
powers  to  ^establish  "the  true  Christian  faith  professed  in 
the  Church  of  England,"  which  according  to  the  purpose  of 
Elizabeth  and  her  successors  had  been  established  in  Vir- 
ginia for  more  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  years.  When  this 
was  accomplished,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  establish 
"Christianity,  general  Christianity,"  under  the  title  of  "the 
Christian  religion,"  Jefferson  again  enlisted  all  his  powers 
to  defeat  the  attempt,  and  it  was  defeated.  And  to  the  day 
of  his  death,  the  one  thing  in  all  his  career  upon  which  he 
looked  with  the  most  satisfaction  was  this  disestablishment 
of  "  the  Christian  religion  "  in  Virginia.  And  now,  lo  !  this 
document  of  which  Jefferson  was  the  author  is  quoted  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and  classed  with  docu- 
ments "one  of  the  purposes"  of  which  was  "the  establish- 
ment of  the  Christian  religion,"  and,  as  having  "  one  mean- 
ing "  with  these,  is  used  to  prove  a  proposition  with  reference 
to  this  nation  which  Jefferson  spent  all  his  powers  and  the 
best  part  of  his  life  in  combating  !  What  would  Jefferson 
himself  say  to  this  use  of  his  language  were  he  Jiere  to  read 
this  decision  ( la 

Except  in  the  matter  of  the  Dred  Scott  decison,  a  more 
perverse  use  of  the  language  of  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence certainly  never  was  made,  than  is  thus  made  in  this 
"Christian  nation"  decision,  February  29,  1892. 

Next  the  court  says  :  — 

"If  we  examine  the  constitutions  of  the  various  States,  we  find  in 
them  a  constant  recognition  of  religious  obligations.  Every  constitution 
of  every  one  of  the  forty-four  States  contains  language  which  either 
directly  or  by  clear  implication  recognizes  a  profound  reverence  for 
religion  and  an  assumption  that  its  influence  in  all  human  affairs  is 
essential  to  the  well  being  of  the  community." 

This  is  all  true  enough  in  itself  ;  but  even  though  it  be 
true  respecting  all  the  States,  that  can  have  no  bearing  what- 

1  -  Pages  693,  694,  this  book. 


WHAT  IS   THE  NATION?  777 

ever  in  any  matter  respecting  the  nation  or  the  national 
jurisdiction  or  the  consideration  of  any  national  question. 
The  Constitution  declares  that  - 

"The  powers  not  delegated  to  (he  United  States  by  the  Constitution, 
nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  States  respectively,  or 
to  the  people." 

No  power  in,  over,  or  concerning  religion  has  been  dele- 
gated to  the  United  States  —  the  nation  —  by  the  Constitution, 
nor  has  such  power  been  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States.  On 
the  contrary,  any  such  power  has  actually  been  prohibited 
to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution.  All  power  and 
jurisdiction,  therefore,  in  all  questions  and  all  matters  of 
whatever  kind  concerning  religion,  are  reserved,  and  belong 
exclusively  to  the  States  or  to  the  people.  And  even  though 
all  the  forty-four  States  had  one  and  the  same  religion 
and  that  specifically  and  by  law  established,  this  would 
mean  absolutely  nothing,  and  could  never  rightly  be  made 
to  mean  anything,  to  the  United  States,  i.  e.,  to  the  nation. 
The  Supreme  Court  of  the  nation  therefore  has  no  right  to 
cite  religious  characteristics  of  the  States,  and  then  from 
these  draw  conclusions  and  make  official  declarations  that 
the  nation  is  "•  religious"  or  "•  Christian  "  or  anything  else 
in  the  way  of  religion.  This  is  why  Madison  said  that 
"there  is  not  a  shadow  of  right  in  the  general  government 
to  intermeddle  with  religion."  And  this  is  why  he  also 
declared  that  the  "  least  interference  "  of  the  general  govern- 
ment with  religion  "would  be  a  most  flagrant  usurpation." 
This,  because  in  so  doing  it  would  be  intruding  into  a  field 
and  entering  upon  the  consideration  of  that  which  is  not 
only  reserved  but  positively  prohibited. 

The  United  States  —  the  nation  indeed  —  is  not  composed 
of  the  States.  The  original  thirteen  States  did  not  compose 
the  nation,  nor  do  the  forty-four  now  compose  it.  The 
United  States,  the  nation,  is  that  power,  that  system,  that 
organization,  above  all  the  States  and  distinct  from  them, 
which  was  created  to  perform  in  behalf  of  the  States  and  the 


778  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

people,  what  neither  the  people,  nor  any  State,  nor  yet  all 
the  States  together,  could  do  for  themselves.  When  the 
thirteen  colonies,  by  conquering  the  British  forces  and  se- 
curing the  recognition  of  their  independence,  had  demon- 
strated that  "these  colonies  are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be, 
free  and  independent  States,"  that  is  exactly  what  they  were. 
They  were  not  only  free  and  independent  of  Great  Britain, 
but  they  were  free  and  independent  of  each  other.  Each 
State  was  as  free  and  independent  of  all  the  others  as  though 
it  stood  alone  on  this  continent.  True,  Articles  of  Confed- 
eration had'been  entered  into  under  which  a  Congress  acted. 
But  the  Congress  had  no  real  power.  It  could  recommend 
to  the  States,  measures  to  be  carried  into  effect,  but  the  States 
could  and  did  do  just  as  they  pleased  as  to  paying  any  atten- 
tion to  the  recommendations.  If  the  measure  suited  them, 
they  would  act  upon  it,  but  if  not,  they  would  n't.  And  if  it 
suited  part  of  them  and  did  not  suit  the  rest,  even  if  it  met 
the  approval  of  all  but  one,  only  the  ones  that  chose  would 
comply  with  the  recommendation,  and  as  to  the  others,  or 
the  other  one,  there  was  no  power  on  earth  that  could  require 
them  or  it  to  act  with  the  States  that  chose  to  comply. 
Washington  described  the  situation  by  saying  :  "  We  are 
one  nation  to-day,  and  thirteen  to-morrow."  This  is  the 
exact  truth.  Practically  they  were  thirteen  independent 
nations,  just  as  those  of  Europe  are. 

Finding  that  they  could  not  long  exist  with  such  a  fast- 
and-loose  order  of  things  as  that,  "a  federal  nation"  was 
created  to  perform,  by  delegated  powers,  in  behalf  of  the 
States  and  the  people,  what  could  not  be  performed  by  them- 
selves. Such  is  the  origin  and  purpose  of  this  nation.  And 
this  is  the  nation.  As  is  well  stated  by  another:  "From 
1776  to  1789  the  United  States  were  a  confederation  ;  after 
1789  it  was  a  federal  nation."— Fiske. ls 

Yet  in  the  nation  each  State  respectively  retains  its  own 
full  sovereignty,  and  each  citizen  individually  his  own  full 
13  "  Civil  Government,"  p.  234. 


RELIGION  IN  THE  STATES.  779 

freedom,  in  all  things  "not  delegated  to  the  United  States 
by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States."  Arid 
as  no  power  in  matters  of  religion  has  been  delegated  to  the 
nation,  but  on  the  contrary  all  such  power  has  been  posi- 
tively prohibited  to  the  nation,  so  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
nation  was  doubly  precluded  from  drawing  from  the  example 
of  the  States  anything  on  the  subject  of  religion,  and  was 
also  doubly  precluded  from  ever  making  any  such  declara- 
tion as  that  "this  is  a  Christian  nation." 

It  is  worth  while  however  to  give  the  citations  which  the 
court  makes  from  the  State  constitutions,  that  the  use  which 
the  court  makes  of  the  national  Constitution  in  connection 
therewith  may  be  clearly  seen.  So  here  they  are  exactly  as 
the  court  sets  them  forth,  except  italics  :  — 

"This  recognition  may  be  in  the  preamble,  such  as  is  found  in  the 
Constitution  of  Illinois,  1870:  'We,  the  people  of  the  State  of  Illinois, 
grateful  to  Almighty  God  for  the  civil,  political,  and  religious  liberty 
which  He  hath  so  long  permitted  us  to  enjoy,  and  looking  to  Him  for  a 
blessing  upon  our  endeavors  to  secure  and  transmit  the  same  unimpaired 
to  succeeding  generations,'  etc. 

"It  may  be  only  in  the  familiar  requisition  that  all  officers  shall  take 
an  oath  closing  with  the  declaration '  so  help  me  God.'  It  may  be  in  clauses 
like  that  of  the  Constitution  of  Indiana,  1816,  Article  XI,  section  4  : 
'The  manner  of  administering  an  oath  or  affirmation  shall  be  such  as  is 
most  consistent  with  the  conscience  of  the  deponent,  and  shall  be  es- 
teemed the  most  solemn  appeal  to  God.'  Or  in  provisions  such  as  are 
found  in  Articles  36  and  37  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  Maryland,  1867:  'That  as  it  is  the  duty  of  every  man  to  itorship 
God  in  such  manner  as  he  thinks  most  acceptable  to  Him,  all  persons 
are  equally  entitled  to  protection  in  their  religious  liberty  ;  wherefore, 
no  person  ought,  by  any  law,  to  be  molested  in  his  person  or  estate  on 
account  of  his  religious  persuasion  or  profession,  or  for  his  religious 
practice,  unless,  under  the  color  of  religion,  he  shall  disturb  the  good  order, 
peace,  or  safety  of  the  State,  or  shall  infringe  the  laws  of  morality,  or  injure 
others  in  their  natural,  civil,  or  religious  rights;  nor  ought  any  person  to  be 
compelled  to  frequent  or  maintain  or  contribute,  unless  on  contract,  to 
maintain  any  place  of  worship,  or  any  ministry  ;  nor  shall  any  person, 
otherwise  competent,  be  deemed  incompetent  as  a  witness,  or  juror,  on 
account  of  his  religious  belief:  Provided,  He  believes  in  the  existence  of 
God,  and  that,  under  His  dispensation,  such  person  will  be  held  morally 


780  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

accountable  for  his  acts,  and  be  rewarded  or  punished  therefor,  either  in 
this  world  or  the  world  to  come.  That  no  religious  test  ought  ever  to  be 
required  as  a  qualification  for  any  office  of  profit  or  trust  in  this  State, 
other  than  a  declaration  of  belief  in  the  eiisten.ce  of  God;  nor  shall  the  leg- 
islature prescribe  any  other  oath  of  office  than  the  oath  prescribed  by  this 
constitution."  Or  like  that  in  Articles  2  and  3,  of  Part  1st,  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  Massachusetts,  1780:  'It  is  the  right  as  well  as  the  duty  of  all 
men  in  society  publicly  and  at  stated  seasons,  to  worship  the  Supreme  Be- 
iny,  the  Great  Creator  and  Preserver  of  the  universe.  .  .  .  As  the  happiness 
of  a  people  and  the  good  order  and  preservation  of  civil  government  essen- 
tially depend  upon  piety,  religion,  and  morality,  and  as  these  cannot  be  gen- 
erally diffused  through  a  community  but  by  the  institution  of  the  public 
worship  of  God  and  of  public  instructions  in  piety,  religion,  and  morality; 
Therefore,  to  promote  their  happiness  and  to  secure  the  good  order  and 
preservation  of  their  government,  the  people  of  this  commonwealth  have 
a  right  to  invest  their  legislature  -with  power  to  authorize  and  require,  and  the 
legislature  shall,  from  time  to  time,  authorize  and  require,  the  several  towns, 
parishes,  precincts,  and  other  bodies-politic  or  religious  societies  to  make 
suitable  provisions,  at  their  own  expense,  for  the  institution  of  the  public 
worship  of  God  and  for  the  support  and  maintenance  of  public  Protestant 
teachers  of  piety,  religion,  and  morality  in  all  cases  where  such  provision 
shall- not  be  made  voluntarily.'  Or  as  in  sections  5  and  14  of  Article  7, 
of  the  Constitution  of  Mississippi,  1832:  '  No  person  who  denies  the  being 
of  a  God,  or  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  shall  hold  any 
office  in  the  civil  department  of  this  State.  .  .  ,  Religion,  morality,  and 
knowledge  being  necessary  to  good  government,  the  preservation  of 
liberty,  and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools,  and  the  means  of  educa- 
tion, shall  forever  be  encouraged  in  this  State.'  Or  by  Article  22  of  the 
Constitution  of  Delaware,  1776,  which  required  all  officers,  besides  an 
oath  of  allegiance,  to  make  and  subscribe  the  following  declaration:  'I, 
A.  B.,  do  prof  ess  faith  in  God  the  Father,  and  in  Jesus  Christ  His  only  Son, 
and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  one  God,  bkssed  for  evermore;  and  I  do  acknowl- 
edge the  Holy  Scriptures  of  ftie  Old  and  New  Testaments  to  be  given  by  divine 
inspiration.' " 

And  the  doctrine  that  is  held  all  through  the  decision, 
that  these  quotations  and  the  Constitution  speak  the  same 
language  and  have  one  meaning,  is  just  at  this  point  em- 
phasized in  the  following  words  :  — 

"Even  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which  is  supposed  to  have 
little  touch  upon  the  private  life  of  the  individual,  contains  in  the  First 
Amendment  a  declaration  common  to  the  constitutions  of  all  the  Slates,  as 


DOES   THE  CONSTITUTION  MEAN   THIS?  781 

follows:  'Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  re- 
ligion, or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof.'  And  also  provides  that 
the  Executive  shall. have  ten  days  (Sundays  excepted)  within  which  to 
determine  whether  he  will  approve  or  veto  a  bill.  [Here  is  a  sly  indica- 
tion that  the  enforcement  of  Sunday  observance  is  constitutional.] 

"  There  u  no  dissonance  in  these  declarations.  There  is  a  universal  lan- 
guage pervading  them  all,  having  one  meaning;  they  affirm  and  re-affirm 
that  this  is  a  religious  nation.  These  are  not  individual  sayings,  declara- 
tions of  private  persons  ;  they  are  organic  utterances;  they  speak  the  voice 
of  the  entire  people. " 

According  to  this  interpretation,  then,  when  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  declares  that  "no  religious  test 
sJiall  ever  be  required  as  a  qualification  to  any  office  or  public 
trust  under  the  United  States,"  it  means  that  "no  religious 
test  ought  ever  to  be  required  ....  other  than  a  belief  in 
the  existence  of  God"  and  of  "  a  future  state  of  rewards  and 
punishments,"  and  a  profession  of  "  faith  in  God  the  Father, 
and  in  Jesus  Christ  his  only  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 
one  God,  blessed  forevermore  ;  and  I  do  acknowledge  the 
Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  to  be  given 
by  divine  inspiration."  For  this  is  what  the  Constitutions  of 
Maryland,  Mississippi,  and  Delaware  plainly  mean  ;  and 
these  and  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  are  pervaded 
by  a  "universal  language,"  "having  one  meaning"  !  !  ! 

And  when-the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  declares 
that  "Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment 
of  religion, "it  means  that  the  Congress  "  shall,  from  time 
to  time,  authorize  and  require  the  several  towns,  parishes,  - 
precincts,  and  other  bodies-politic,  or  religious  societies, 
to  make  suitable  provisions,  at  their  own  expense,  for  the 
institution  of  the  public  worship  of  God,  and  for  the  support 
and  maintenance  of  public  Protestant  teachers  of  piety, 
religion,  and  morality,  in  all  cases  where  such  provisions 
shall  not  be  made  voluntarily  "  !  !  !  For  plainly  that  is  what 
the  Constitution  of  Massachusetts  means,  and  behold  that 
and  the  Constitution  of 'the  United  States  are  pervaded  by 
"  a  universal  language  "  "  having  one  meaning"  ! 


782  THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

How  the  court  could  present  such  a  string  of  quotations, 
every  one  of  which  distinctly  contemplated  an  establishment 
of  religion  and  the  prohibition  of  the  free  exercise  thereof, 
and  then  quote  this  clause  of  the  national  Constitution,  which 
in  every  feature  and  every  intent,  absolutely  prohibits  any 
establishment  of  religion,  and  any  interference  with  the  free 
exercise  thereof  —  how  the  court  could  do  all  this  and  then 
declare  that  "there  is  no  dissonance  "  in  the  declarations, 
that  they  all  have  the  same  language,  and  "  one  meaning," 
is  a  most  astonishing  thing.  If  such  a  thing  had  been  done 
by  any  of  the  common  run  of  American  citizens,  it  could 
have  been  considered  as  nothing  less  than  wildly  absurd  ; 
but  coming  as  it  does  from  such  a  source  as  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  whole  nation,  it  is  as  far  worse  as  could  be 
possible.  To  say  that  it  is  absurd  is  not  enough,  it  is 
simply  preposterous.  And  yet,  preposterous  as  it  is,  it  is 
expected  to,  and,  so  far  as  the  great  mass  of  the  people  are 
concerned,  it  undoubtedly  will,  carry  with  it  all  the  weight 
of  supreme  national  law. 

All  this  is  bad  enough,  and  preposterous  enough,  in  itself; 
but  there  is  another  consideration  that  even  magnifies  it, — 
that  is,  the  leaving  out,  the  complete  ignoring,  of  all  of  the 
history  and  all  the  essential  facts  which  are  pertinent  to 
the  question.14  Why  should  the  court  leave  out  Jefferson, 
Madison,  and  Washington  from  the  place  where  they  only  and 
wholly  belong,  and  drag  Ferdinand,  Isabella,  and  Elizabeth 
into  the  place  where  they  do  not  and  cannot  by  any  shadow 
of  right  belong?  Why  should  Jefferson,  Madison,  and 
Washington  not  only  be  allowed  no  place  by  the  court,  but 
be  compelled  by  the  court  to  give  place  to  Ferdinand,  Isa- 
bella, and  Elizabeth  ?  Why  should  the  purposes  of  Jefferson, 
Madison,  and  Washington,  and  the  other  fathers  who  made 
this  nation,  be  completely  ignored,  and  the  purposes  of 
Ferdinand,  Isabella,  Elizabeth,  and  the  Puritans  be  taken  up 
and  exalted  to  their  place  ?  Why  should  all  the  history  of  the 
u  Glance  again  at  pages  682-696  and  consider  this  point. 


THE  ABSURDITY  OF  IT.  783 

making  of  the  national  Constitution  be  ignored  as  completely 
as  though  there  were  no  such  history,  and  all  this  other  stuff 
be  taken  up  and  discussed  and  approved  as  though  this  were 
the  only  historical  evidence  there  is  on  the  subject?  Why 
should  the  national  Constitution  be  interpreted  and  construed 
according  to  the  purposes  of  Ferdinand,  Isabella,  Elizabeth 
and  her  successors  ;  the  Puritans  ;  and  the  constitutions  of 
the  States;  instead  of  the  purposes  of  Jefferson,  Madison, 
Washington,  and  the  other  fathers  who  made  it  ?  Why 
should  the  real  meaning  which  our  Fathers  gave  to  the  Con- 
stitution be  supplanted  with  a  meaning  that  is  as  foreign 
to  it  as  the  sovereigns  of  Spain  and  England  are  foreign  to 
the  nation  itself  to-day  ?  Why  should  the  only  history  that 
is  pertinent  to  the  question  be  wholly  ignored,  and  that 
which  in  every  element  is  absolutely  impertinent  be  exalted 
and  honored  in  its  stead  ? 

The  language  in  which  Abraham  Lincoln  characterized 
the  position  of  Chief  Justice  Taney  in  the  Dred  Scott  decis- 
ion, and  of  Stephen  A.  Douglas  in  the  defense  of  it,  is  the 
language  that  is  most  fitting  to  the  position  of  the  Supreme 
Court  in  this  "Christian  nation"  decision;  for  here  the 
two  decisions  are  perfectly  parallel.  Lincoln's  words  are 
as  follows  :  — 

"I  ask,  How  extraordinary  a  ^ing  it  is  that  a  man  who  has  occupied 
a  seat  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  [or  on  the  bench  of  the  Supreme 
Court  —  A.  T.  j.]  of  the  United  States  .  .  .  pretending  to  give  a  truthful 
and  accurate  history  of  the  slavery  question  [or  of  the  question  of  re- 
ligion and  the  nation — A.  T.  j.]  in  this  country,  should  so  entirely  ignore 
the  whole  of  that  portion  of  our  history  —  the  most  important  of  all  ! 
Is  it  not  a  most  extraordinary  spectacle,  that  a  man  should  stand  up  and 
ask  for  any  confidence  in  his  statements,  who  sets  out  as  he  does  with 
portions  of  history,  calling  upon  the  people  to  believe  that  it  is  a  true 
and  fair  representation,  when  the  leading  part,  the  controlling  feature, 
of  the  whole  history  is  carefully  surpressed  ? 

"And  now  he  asks  the  community  to  believe  that  the  men  of  the 
Revolution  were  in  favor  of  his  '  great  principle,'  when  we  have  the 
naked  history  that  they  themselves  dealt  with  this  very  subject-matter 
of  his  principle,  and  utterly  repudiated  his  principle  —  acting  upon  a 

58 


784  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

precisely  contrary  ground.  It  is  as  impudent  and  absurd  as  if  a  prose- 
outing  attorney  should  stand  up  before  a  jury,  and  ask  them  to  convict 
A  as  the  murderer  of  B,  while  B  was  standing  alive  before  them." 

But  the  court  does  not  stop  even  here.  Having  estab- 
lished "the  Christian  religion"  for  "the  entire  people,  "and 
settled  all  the  appurtenances  thereto  as  within  the  meaning 
of  the  Constitution,  the  court  cites  and  sanctions  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania  that  "Christian- 
ity, general  Christianity,  is,  and  always  has  been,  part  of  the 
common  law,"  and  then  proceeds  to  sanction  also  the  doc- 
trine that  it  is  blasphemy  to  speak  or  act  in  contempt  "of 
the  religion  professed  by  almost  the  whole  community." 
This  is  done  by  citing  the  pagan  decision  of  "Chancellor 
Kent,  the  great  commentator  on  American  law,  speaking  as 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York "  which 
"assumes  that  we  are  a  Christian  people."  Here  is  the  lan- 
guage of  the  court  on  that  strain  :  — 

"While  because  of  the  general  recognition  of  this  truth  the  question 
has  seldom  been  presented  to  the  courts,  yet  we  find  that  in  Updegraph 
vs.  The  Commonwealth  (11  Serg.  and  Rawle,  394,  400)  it  was  decided 
that  'Christianity,  general  Christianity,  is,  and  always  has  been  a  part  of 
the  common  law  of  Pennsylvania;  .  .  .  not  Christianity  with  an  estab- 
lished church,  and  tithes,  and  spiritual  courts  ;  but  Christianity  with  lib- 
erty of  conscience  to  all  men.'  And  in  The  People  vs.  Ruggles  (8  Johns. 
290,  294,  295),  Chancellor  Kent,  the  great  commentator  on  American  law, 
speaking  as  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York,  said  : 
'  The  people  of  this  State,  in  common  witii  the  people  of  this  country, 
profess  the  general  doctrines  of  Christianity,  as  the  rule  of  their  faith  and 
practice  ;  and  to  scandalize  the  Author  of  these  doctrines  is  not  only,  in 
a  religious  point  of  view,  extremely  impious,  but,  even  in  respect  to  the 
obligations  due  to  society,  is  a  gross  violation  of  decency  and  good  order. 
.  .  .  The  free,  equal,  and  undisturbed  enjoyment  of  religious  opinion, 
whatever  it  may  be,  and  free  and  decent  discussions  on  any  religious 
subject,  is  granted  and  secured  ;  but  to  revile,  with  malicious  and  blasphe- 
mous contempt,  the  religion  prof essed  by  almost  the  whole  community,  is  an 
abuse  of  that  riyJit.  Nor  are  we  bound,  by  any  expressions  in  the  Con 
stitution,  as  some  have  strangely  supposed,  either  not  to  punish  at  all,  or 
to  punish  indiscriminately,  the  like  attacks  upon  the  religion  of  Mahomet 
or  of  the  Grand  Lama;  and  for  this  plain  reason,  that  the  case  assumes  that 


STATE  AUTHORITY  NOT  NATIONAL  AUTHORITY.    785 

we  are  a  Christian  people,  and  the  morality  of  the  country  is  deeply  in- 
grafted upon  Christianity,  and  not  upon  the  doctrines  or  worship  of  those 
impostors.'  And  in  the  famous  case  of  Vidal  vs.  Girard's  Executors  (2 
How.,  127,  198),  this  court,  while  sustaining  the  will  of  Mr.  Girard,  with 
its  provision  for  the  creation  of  a  college  into  which  no  minister  should 
be  permitted  to  enter,  observed:  'It  is  also  said,  and  truly,  that  the 
Christian  religion  is  a  part  of  the  common  law  of  Pennsylvania.'" 

But  even  though  it  be  decided,  and  declared,  and  ad- 
mitted, that  "Christianity,  general  Christianity,  is  and  al- 
ways has  been  "  not  only  a  part  but  the  whole  of  the  common 
law,  and  the  statute  law  also,  of  Pennsylvania ;  and  that  it 
is  "blasphemy"  in  New  York  to  speak  or  act  in  contempt 
of  the  established  religion  ;  that  never  can  rightly  be  made 
to  mean  anything  to  the  nation.  And  even  though  all  this 
were  a  fact  within  the  legitimate  consideration  of  the  Su- 
preme Courts  of  Pennsylvania.  New  York,  and  all  the  other 
State  Supreme  Courts  in  the  land,  it  never  could  by  any  kind 
of  right  be  a  fact  within  the  legitimate  consideration  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  nation  in  the  construction  of  any  na- 
tional law  or  the  decision  of  any  national  question. 

There  remains  but  one  thing  more  to  complete  the  per- 
fect likeness  of  the  whole  papal  system,  and  that  is  the  direct 
and  positive  sanction  of  Sunday  laws.  Nor  is  this  one  thing 
lacking.  As  before,  observed,  it  is  indirectly  indicated  in 
the  quotation  from  the  national  Constitution.  But  the  court 
does  not  stop  with  that ;  it  makes  Sunday  laws  one  of  the 
"organic  utterances,"  which  prove  conclusively  that  "this 
is  a  Christian  nation."  The  words  are  as  follows  :  — 

"If  we  pass  beyond  these  matters  to  a  view  of  American  life  as  ex- 
pressed by  its  laws,  its  business,  its  customs,  and  its  society,  we  find 
everywhere  a  clear  recognition  of  the  same  truth.  Among  other  matters, 
note  the  following  :  The  form  of  oath  usually  prevailing,  concluding  with 
an  appeal  to  the  Almighty;  the  custom  of  opening  sessions  of  all  deliber- 
ative bodies,  and  most  conventions,  with  prayer;  the  prefatory  words  of 
all  wills,  'In  the  name  of  God,  Amen;'  the  laics  respecting  the  observance 
of  the  Sabbath  with  the  general  cessation  of  all  secular  business,  and  the 
closing  of  courts,  legislatures,  and  other  similar  public  assemblies  on  that 
day.  .  .  .  These,  and  many  other  matters  which  might  be  noticed,  add  a 


786  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

volume  of  unofficial  declarations  to  the  mass  of  organic  utterances  that  THIS 
is  A  CHRISTIAN  NATION. 

Here  we  may  properly  reduce  to  the  simple  and  direct 
form  again  this  whole  discussion  as  presented  by  the  court. 
So  stated  it  stands  thus  :  - 

(a)  "The  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion," 
"  Christianity,  general  Christianity,"  "  is  one  of  the  purposes 
of  all  these  "  documents. 

(5)  "Even  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  .  .  . 
contains  in  the  First  Amendment  a  declaration  common  to" 
all  these  ;  for  "  there  is  a  universal  language  pervading  tltem 
all,  having  one  meaning;  they  affirm  and  re-affirm  that  this 
is  a  religious  nation.  .  .  .  They  are  organic  utterances  ; 
they  speak  the  voice  of  the  entire  people." 

(c)  Consequently,  "this  is  a  Christian  nation." 

And  therefore  the  decision  concludes, — 

"The  construction  ["of  this  statute"]  invoked  cannot  be  accepted 
as  correct.  It  is  a  case  where  there  was  presented  a  definite  evil,  in  view 
of  which  the  legislature  used  general  terms  with  the  purpose  of  reach- 
ing all  phases  of  that  evil,  and  thereafter,  unexpectedly,  it  is  developed 
that  the  general  language  thus  employed  is  broad  enough  to  reach  cases 
and  acts  which  the  whole  Instory  and  life  of  the  country  affirm  could  not 
have  been  intentionally  legislated  against.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  courts, 
under  those  circumstances,  to  say  that,  however  broad  the  language  of 
the  statute  may  be,  the  act,  although  within  the  letter,  is  not  within  the 
intention  of  the  legislature,  and  therefore  cannot  be  within  the  statute. 

"The  judgment  will  be  reversed,  and  the  case  remanded  for  further 
proceedings  in  accordance  with  this  opinion." 

"In  accordance  with  this  opinion  "  then  let  us  recapitu- 
late, and  see  what  has  been  done  by  it.  "The  Christian  re- 
ligion," that  is,  "Christianity,  general  Christianity,"  is 
legally  recognized  and  declared  to  be  the  established  religion 
of  this  nation,  and  that  consequently  "this  is  a  Christian 
nation."  With  this  also,  "in  language  more  or  less  em- 
phatic," there  is  justified  by  the  "meaning"  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  (1)  the  maintenance  of  the 
discipline  of  the  churches  by  the  civil  power;  (2)  the  require- 


THE   "NEW  ORDER   OP   THINGS"   REVERSED.        787 

ment  of  the  religious  oath;  (3)  the  requirement  of  the  relig- 
ious test  oath  as  a  qualification  for  office;  (4)  public  taxation 
for  the  support  of  religion  and  religious  teachers;  (5)  the  re- 
quirement of  a  belief  in  the  Trinity  and  the  inspiration  of 
the  "Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments;"  (0) 
the  guilt  of  blasphemy  upon  every  one  who  speaks  or  acts 
in  contempt  of  the  established  religion;  and  (7)  laws  for 
the  observance  of  Sunday,  with  the  general  cessation  of 
all  "secular  business." 

All  this  is  declared  by  unanimous  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States.  And  what  the  Supreme  Court 
says  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution  is,  that  is  its  meaning 
and  that  is  the  law  until  the  decision  is  reversed.  Therefore, 
again  we  say,  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  say;  as  certainly  as 
logic  is  logic,  and  truth  is  truth,  it  is  demonstrated  that  in 
this  decision  the  Supreme  court  of  the  United  States  has  sub- 
verted the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  in  its  essential 
meaning  as  regards  the  Christian  religion  or  the  establish- 
ment thereof. 

Now  what  more  was  ever  required  by  the  papacy,  and 
all  phases  of  the  old  order  of  things,  than  is  thus  brought 
within  the  meaning  of  the  national  Constitution  by  this  de- 
cision ?  What  more  was  ever  required  by  the  papacy  itself, 
than  that  "the  Christian  religion"  should  be  the  national 
religion  ;  that  the  discipline  of  the  Church  should  be  main- 
tained by  the  civil  power  ;  that  the  religious  test-oath  should 
be  applied  to  all ;  that  the  public  should  be  taxed  for  the 
support  of  religion  and  religious  worship  ;  that  there  should 
be  required  a  belief  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  the 
inspiration  of  the  "Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament;  "  that  the  guilt  of  "blasphemy  " 16  should  be  vis- 

15  It  will  not  be  amiss  right  here  to  recall  the  fact  that  Martin  Luther,  by 
an  official  edict  issued  by  the  Emperor  Charles  V,  was  made  an  outlaw  in  all 
Europe,  because  he  had  "  sought  to  destroy  the  holy  church  by  means  of  books 
flllfd  with  blasphemy." 


788  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

ited  upon  every  one  who  should  speak  or  act  "in  contempt 
of  the  religion  professed  by  almost  the  whole  community  ;  " 
and  that  everybody  should  be  required  by  law  to  observe 
Sunday?  Indeed  what  more  than  this  could  be  required  or 
even  desired  by  the  most  absolute  religious  despotism  that 
could  be  imagined  ?  Therefore  it  is  pertinent  here  to  inquire, 
Does  this  decision  maintain  the  "New  Order  of  Things" 
to  which  this  nation  stands  pledged  by  the  Great  Seal  of  the 
United  States  ?  —  No,  no,  twenty  times  no.  On  the  contrary 
it  sanctions,  and  restores,  and  fastens  upon  this  nation,  the 
old  order  of  things  which  our  revolutionary  fathers  hoped 
that  we  should  forever  escape,  through  their  sublime  efforts 
which  culminated  in  the  creation  of  this  nation  and  the 
formation  of  the  national  Constitution  —  as  it  reads,  and  as 
they  meant  it. 

What  more  could  be  done  to  create  the  very  image  of  the 
papacy  in  this  nation,  in  the  principle  of  the  thing,  than  is 
done  in  this  decision?  In  principle  we  say  ;  not  in  its  posi- 
tive workings  of  course,  because  the  decision  in  itself,  on 
this  point,  does  not  bear  the  force  of  a  statute  that  can  be 
made  at  once  obligatory  upon  all  by  the  executive  power  of 
the  nation.  But  it  does  sanction  and  justify  beforehand  any 
and  every  encroachment  that  the  religious  power  may  make 
on  the  civil,  and  every  piece  of  legislation  that  Congress 
might  enact  on  the  subject  of  religion  or  religious  observ- 
ances ;  so  that  by  it  the  national  door  is  opened  wide  for  the 
religious  element  to  enter  and  take  possession  in  whatever 
way  it  chooses  or  can  make  effective.  And  there  stands  at 
the  door  ready  and  determined  to  enter  and  take  possession, 
the  strongest  religio-political  combination  that  could  be 
formed  in  the  land. 

Therefore  we  say  that  although  life  is  not  by  this  given 
to  this  image  that  it  should  of  itself  speak  and  act  (Rev. 
13  : 15)  ;  yet  so  far  as  the  making  of  the  evil  thing,  and  the 
establishment  of  the  principle  of  it,  are  concerned,  it  is  cer- 


THE  IMAGE   OF   THE  PAPACY.  789 

tainly  done.  The  tree  does  not  yet  stand  with  its  branches 
widespread  bearing  its  pernicious  fruit,  but  the  tree  implanted. 
And  as  certainly  as  the  branches  and  the  fruit  are  all  in  the 
natural  stock  that  is  planted,  and  it  is  only  a  question  of 
time  when  they  will  appear,  so  certainly  the  widespreading 
branches  and  the  pernicious  fruit  of  the  full-grown  tree  of 
religious  despotism  are  in  the  evil  stock  of  Church  and  State, 
of  "the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion,"  that  has 
been  planted  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  and  for  this  nation  ; 
and  it  is  only  a  question  of  time  when  these  fruits  will  inevit- 
ably appear. 

Look  again  at  pages  281-293  of  this  book  ;  and  see  how, 
and  how  rapidly  too,  this  same  thing  progressed  before. 
There  it  is  seen  how  that  there  was  in  the  Roman  Empire, 
as  there  is  now  in  the. United  States,  a  powerful  ecclesiastical 
organization,  the  leaders  and  managers  of  which  were  "only 
anxious  to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind  of  sovereignty 
for  themselves."  And  as  we  have  seen,  the  Edict  of  Milan, 
which  among  other  things  ordered  that  the  confiscated  church 
property  should  be  restored  "to  the  whole  body  of  Chris- 
tians," was  no  sooner  issued  than  this  hierarchy  seized  upon 
it  and  made  it  an  issue  by  which  to  secure  the  imperial 
recognition  and  legal  establishment  of  the  Catholic  Church  of 
the  Christians,  by  asserting  her  arrogant  claim  that  she  only 
is  Christian  and  all  others  are  heretics  and  therefore  not 
Christians  at  all.  And  we  have  seen  how  fully  she  succeeded 
in  this  arrogant  and  insidious  enterprise.  Nor  was*  she  long 
in  accomplishing  it.  The  Edict  of  Milan  was  issued  in 
March,  A.  D.  313.  Before  that  month  expired,  the  de- 
cision was  rendered  that  the  imperial  favors  were  for  the 
Catholic  Church  only.  In  the  autumn  of  the  same  year  — 
313  —  the  first  council  sat  to  decide  which  was  the  Catholic 
Church.  In  the  summer  of  314  sat  the  second  council  on 
the  same  question.  And  in  316  the  decree  was  sent  to 
Cecilianus  empowering  him  to  distribute  that  money  to  the 


790  THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

ministers  of  "the  legitimate  and  most  holy  Catholic  religion," 
and  to  use  the  civil  power  to  force  the  Donatists  to  submit 
to  the  decision  of  the  councils  and  the  emperor. 

The  Edict  of  Milan,  March,  313,  named  "the  whole  body 
of  Christians"  as  the  beneficiaries,  without  any  qualification 
or  any  sectarian  designation.  Before  the  expiration  of  that 
month,  the  provisions  of  the  edict  were  confined  to  "the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  Christians"  alone.  In  the  autumn 
of  the  same  year,  when  the  emperor  wrote  to  the*  bishop  of 
Rome,  appointing  the  first  council,  he  defined  the  established 
church  as  "the  holy  Catholic  Church."  The  following  sum- 
mer, 314,  when  he  called  the  second  council,  he  referred  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  embodying  the  "most 
holy  religion."  And  when  it  had  been  decided  which  party 
represented  this  "  most  holy  religion,"  then  in  316  his  letter 
and  commission  to  Cecilianus  defined  it  as  "the  legitimate 
and  most  holy  Catholic  religion." 

Nor  was  this  all.  While  this  was  going  on,  also  about 
the  year  314,  the  first  edict  in  favor  of  Sunday  was  issued, 
though  it  was  blended  with  "Friday."  It  ordered  that  on 
Friday  and  on  Sunday  "  no  judicial  or  other  business  should 
be  transacted,  but  that  God  should  be  served  with  prayers 
and  supplications,"  and  in  321,  Friday  observance  was 
dropped  and  Sunday  alone  was  exalted  by  the  famous  Sun- 
day-rest law  of  Constantirie;  all  in  furtherance  of  the  am- 
bition of  the  ecclesiastics  to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind 
of  sovereignty  for  themselves.  In  323,  by  the  direct  and 
officious  aid  of  the  Catholic  Church,  Constantine  succeeded 
in  defeating  Licinius  and  making  himself  sole  emperor.  No 
sooner  was  this  accomplished  than  the  religious  liberty  as- 
sured to  "the  Christians"  by  the  Edict  of  Milan,  like  the 
provisions  of  the  same  Edict  restoring  confiscated  property 
to  the  Christians,  was  by  a  public  and  express  edict  limited 
to  Catholics  alone. 

Thus  in  less  than  eleven  years  from  the  issuing  of  the 
Edict  of  Milan,  the  Catholic  Church  stood  in  full  and  exclu- 


A.    D.   Slil-323   AND   1893.  791 

sive  possession  of  the  authority  of  the  empire  both  in  the 
rights  of  property  and  the  right  to  worship  under  the  profes- 
sion of  Christianity  ;  and  with  a  specific  and  direct  commis- 
sion to  use  that  power  and  authority  to  compel  the  submission 
of  "heretics."  Thus  was  made  the  papacy  —  the  beast  of 
Revelation  13:1-10  —  and  all  that  ever  came  in  its  career 
from  that  day  to  this  has  been  but  the  natural  and  inevitable 
growth  of  the  power  and  the  prerogatives  which  were  then 
possessed  and  claimed  by  the  Catholic  Church. 

And  it  all  came  from  the  Edict  of  Milan  bestowing  gov- 
ernmental favors  upon  "the  Christians."  No  man  can  fairly 
deny  that  in  the  Edict  of  Milan  and  in  the  religio-political 
intrigue  that  lay  behind  it,  there  was  contained  the  whole 
papacy.  No  man  can  successfully  deny  that  the  Edict  of 
Milan,  though  appearing  innocent  enough  upon  its  face, 
contained  the  whole  papacy,  or  that  the  things  that  followed 
in  the  ten  years  up  to  323,  which  we  have  sketched,  were 
anything  else  than  the  logical  and  inevitable  development  of 
the  evil  that  lay  wrapped  up  in  that. 

Now  here  is  a  question  that  is  worthy  of  the  most  serious 
consideration  by  the  American  people.  If  a  thing  appearing 
so  just  and  innocent  as  does  the  Edict  of  Milan,  could  so 
easily  be  made  to  produce  such  a  world  of  mischief  in  so 
short  a  time,  and  be  a  curse  to  the  world  forever  after,  what 
then  can  be  the  result  of  this  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  to  tJie  same  purpose  as  that,  but  which 
has  not,  in  any  sense,  any  appearance  of  justice  or  innocence  ? 

Behind  this  "Christian  nation"  decision  lies  an  arro- 
gant and  meddling  ecclesiastical  organization  "only  anxious 
to  assert  the  government  as  a  kind  of  sovereignty  for  them- 
selves," and  ready  to  push  the  arguments  and  the  conclusion 
of  the  decision  to  the  utmost  limit  of  their  logic,  as  certainly 
as  there  was  the  same  thing  behind  the  Edict  of  Milan  ready 
and  determined  to  push  it  to  the  furthest  possible  limit  in 
their  own  favor.  And  as  certainly  as  the  situation  here  is  the 
same  as  it  was  there,  so  certainly  will  the  same  course  in 


792  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

principle  and  in  practice  be  followed  here  as  was  there,  and 
so  certainly  the  evil  results  which  sprung  from  that  will  again 
appear  before  the  country  and  before  the  world.  "Old  con- 
troversies which  have  apparently  been  hushed  for  a  long 
time  will  be  revived,  and  new  controversies  will  spring  up  ; 
new  and  old  will  commingle,  and  this  will  take  place  right 
early."  And  when  they  do,  then,  with  national  prestige 
and  political  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  power  and  preferment, 
the  prizes  to  be  contended  for,  all  the  bitterness  and  inten- 
sity of  the  old  controversies  will  be  revived  and  manifested, 
and  even  intensified.  Commotion,  strife,  violence,  persecu- 
tion, and  all  the  evil  accompaniments  of  an  established  relig- 
ion, will  afflict  and  even  ruin  the  nation,  even  as  that  former 
thing  afflicted  and  finally  ruined  the  Roman  Empire. 

This  is  why  Jefferson,  Madison,  and  their  wide-awake 
associates  in  Virginia,  so  strongly  and  persistently  opposed 
the  movement  to  establish  "the  Christian  religion  "  in  that 
State.  This  is  why  they  pertinently  and  forcibly  inquired, 
"  Who  does  not  see  that  the  same  authority  which  can  estab- 
lish Christianity,  in  exclusion  of  all  other  religions,  may 
establish  with  the  same  ease  any  particular  sect  of  Christians 
in  exclusion  of  all  other  sects  ?  "  This  is  why  they  denounced 
that  bill  as  "  a  signal  of  persecution,"  as  "  differing  from 
the  Inquisition  only  in  degree,"  and  as  "the  first  step  in  the 
career  of  intolerance,"  in  which  the  Inquisition  is  "the  last 
step."  This  was  all  true,  every  word  of  it.  But  if  this  was 
true  of  only  an  attempt  to  establish  the  Christian  religion, 
how  much  more  is  it  true  of  this  decision,  which  actually  es- 
tablishes the  Christian  religion  as  the  national  religion,  and 
upon  "proofs"  and  "authorities"  presented,  positively  de- 
clares that  "  this  is -a  Christian  nation.'" 

Those  wise  men,  then,  "saw  all  the  consequences  in  the 
principle,  and  they  avoided  the  consequences  by  denying 
the  principle."  It  is  certainly  true  now,  as  it  was  then, 
that  all  the  consequences  are  in  the  principle.  And  as  the 
principle  stands  established  and  justified  by  the  supreme 


THE  RIGHTS   OF    THE  PEOPLE.  793 

judicial  authority  in  the  nation,  so  in  that  all  the  conse- 
quences are  established  and  justified.  In  short,  as  certainly 
as  in  the  Edict  of  Milan  there  was  wrapped  up  the  papacy, 
just  so  certainly  in  this  Supreme  Court  decision  there  is 
wrapped  up  the  image  of  the  papacy.  And  as  truly  as 
the  issuing  of  the  Edict  of  Milan  was  in  principle  and  in 
embryo  the  making  of  the  papacy  —  the  beast  —  so  truly 
this  decision  is  in  principle  and  in  embryo  the  making  of  the 
image  of  the  papacy  —  the  image  of  the  beast.  Both  are 
described  in  their  career  and  in  their  end  in  Kev.  13  : 1-17  ; 
14:9-16;  and  19  : 11-21. 

It  is  too  late  now  to  avoid  the  consequences  by  denying 
the  principle,  as  the  principle  is  already  established,  and  all 
the  consequences  are  in  the  principle  ;  too  late,  unless  the 
whole  people  should  rise  up  as  one  man  and  reverse  this 
decision,  and  with  one  voice  repudiate  it  as  it  deserves,  even 
in  the  words  in  which  United  States  Senator  William  Pitt 
Fessenden,  denounced  the  famous  Dred  Scott  decision,  as 
"utterly  at  variance  with  all  truth,  utterly  destitute  of  all 
legal  logic,  founded  on  error,  and  unsupported  by  anything 
resembling  argument."  19 

For,  "  The  people  of  these  United  States  are  the  rightful 
masters  of  both  congresses  and  courts,  not  to  overthrow  the 
Constitution,  but  to  overthrow  the  men  who  pervert  the 
Constitution.'1 — Abraham  Lincoln. n 

The  right  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  appeal 
from  any  action  of  the  government  of  the  United  States, 
when  it  touches  any  of  their  reserved  rights,  is  an  inalien- 
able right. 

The  authority  of  the  government  of  the  United  States  is 
delegated,  and  not  absolute.  The  authority  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  is  not  the  supreme  authority  in  the 
United  States,  because  the  people  have  not  delegated  all 


16  Elaine's  "Twenty  Years  of  Congress,"  vol.  i,  p.  133. 

17 Speech  "To  the  Kentucklans,"  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  September,  1859. 


794  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

their  rights.  In  the  Constitution  the  people  have  declared 
and  established  that  — 

"The  enumeration  in  the  Constitution  of  certain  rights  shall  not  be 
construed  to  deny  or  disparage  others  retained  by  the  people." 

The  government  is  but  the  creature  of  the  Constitution. 
The  people  made  the  Constitution  with  the  delegation  only  of 
certain  rights  to  be  exercised  by  the  government.  Therefore 
the  people  are  the  supreme  authority  in  the  United  States, 
and  the  source  of  final  appeal  in  all  questions  of  their  re- 
served rights.  And  "prudent  jealousy"  in  the  guardian- 
ship of  these  rights  against  encroachment  on  the  part  of  the 
government,  is  the  first  duty  of  American  citizens;  and  relig- 
ious rights  are  the  chief  of  all  these  reserved  rights,  no  less 
than  the  chief  of  all  natural  rights. 

The  government,  being  but  a  creature  of  the  Constitution, 
is  subject  to  the  Constitution.  Having  been  created  by  the 
people,  through  the  Constitution,  it  is  bound  by  the  limita- 
tions prescribed  by  the  people  in  the  Constitution. 

In  the  Constitution  the  people  have  declared  that  — 

"The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution, 
nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively, 
or  to  the  people." 

No  power  concerning  religion  has  been  delegated  to  the 
United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  has  such  power  been 
prohibited  by  it  to  the  States. 

All  questions,  and  all  matters  of  religion,  therefore,  are 
withheld  from  the  government  of  the  United  States,  and  are 
reserved  and  belong  exclusively  to  the  States  or  to  the 
people. 

As  no  power  concerning  religion  has  been  delegated  to 
the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it 
to  the  States ;  as  all  power  and  jurisdiction  in  matters  of 
religion  has  been  reserved  exclusively  to  the  States  or  to 
the  people,  it  follows  that  the  government  has  no  power  or 


SUCS  A   DECISION  PROHIBITED.  795 

authority  or  jurisdiction  in,  over,  or  concerning  the  subject 
of  religion,  and  that  therefore  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  had  no  authority  or  right  to  declare  the 
American  people  "a  religious  people,"  or  this  nation  "a 
Christian  nation." 

Again :  not  only  has  no  authority  or  jurisdiction  in 
matters  of  religion  been  delegated  to  the  United  States 
by  the  Constitution,  but  all  such  authority  or  jurisdiction 
has  actually  been  prohibited  to  the  United  States  by  the 
Constitution.15 

Therefore,  as  all  religion,  and  specifically  the  Christian 
religion,  is  prohibited  the  government  of  the  United  States 
by  the  supreme  law  ;  and  as  the  Supreme  Court  is  but  a  co- 
ordinate branch  of  the  government  of  the  United  States, 
it  follows  that  the  Supreme  Court  not  only  had  no  right 
or  power  to  declare,  but  was  directly  and  positively  pro- 
hibited by  the  supreme  law  from  declaring,  the  American 
people  "a  religious  people,"  or  this  nation  "a  Christian 
nation."  And  it  never  can  be  legitimate  for  the  court  to 
undertake  to  tell  in  what  sense  it  used  the  expression,  ;'  This 
is  a  Christian  Nation,"  because  the  court  had  no  shadow  of 
right  to  use  the  expression  at  all. 

Finally  :  As  the  government  is  but  the  creature  of  the 
supreme  law,  it  is  subject  to  the  supreme  law,  and  is  bound 
by  the  limitations  thereof.  And  though  the  Supreme  Court 
is  the  official  interpreter  of  the  supreme  law,  the  court 
itself  is  bound  by  the  limitations  of  the  supreme  law, —  the 
Constitution, —  and  must  act  within  the  limitations  therein 
set  to  its  powers  as  a  co-ordinate  branch  of  the  national 
government.  For  any  branch  of  the  government  to  go 
beyond  these  limitations,  is  to  take  official  action  without 
authority,  and  is  therefore  usurpation.  This  is  why  Madison 
said,  and  most  truly,  that  the  "  least  interference  "  or  ''inter- 
meddling of  the  general  government  with  religion,  would 

be  A  MOST  FLAGRANT  USURPATION." 

15  Pages  675,  676  of  this  book. 


796  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 


NOTE    ON    THE    DRED    SCOTT    DECISION. 

In  the  preceding  discussion,  mention  has  been  several  times  made 
of  the  Dred  Scott  decision  and  the  parallel  between  it  and  this  "Chris- 
tian nation '' decision.  Space  will  not  permit  a  full  showing  of  this 
parallel,  but  a  synopsis  may  be  given. 

The  principle  of  the  Dred  Scott  decisio*h  was  the  establishment  of 
slavery  as  a  national  institution  by  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution. 
The  key-note  of  the  decision  which  aroused  the  popular  mind,  and  upon 
which  the  popular  opposition  to  the  decision  was  conducted,  was  the 
statement  that  the  black  man  "had  no  rights  which  the  white  man 
Was  bound  to  respect."  To  prove  this  the  court  cit<'d  "historical 
facts"  from  "the  public  history  of  every  European  nation,"  from  "the 
legislation  of  the  different  colonies,"  and  from  "  the  plain  and  unequivo- 
cal language  of  the  laws  of  the  several  States," — Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut, etc.  To  sustain  the  proposition,  the  court  also  cited  "  Chan- 
cellor Kent,  whose  accuracy  and  research  no  one  will  question."  In 
addition  to  all  this,  the  court  rung  in  part  of  the  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
clence, —  that  "all  men  are  created  equal  and  are  endowed  by  their 
Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights,  among  which  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness," — even  this  was  made  to  support  that 
proposition  by  the  court's  declaring  that  in  these  words  the  Declaration 
did  not  refer  to  persons  of  the  African  race;  that  in  this  the  Declaration 
meant  the  same  as  those  European,  colonial,  and  State  documents.  And 
then  the  court  reached  the  climax  and  conclusion  of  its  argument  by 
finding  and  deciding  that  the  Constitution  meant  the  same  as  all  these 
other  documents  meant  —  that  the\T  had  all  one  language  and  one  mean- 
ing. The  ground  covered  was  precisely  the  same  as  that  covered  in 
this  "Christian  nation  "  decision,  the  sources  of  the  "historical  facts" 
were  precisely  the  same  as  in  this,  the  course  of  the  argument  was  the 
same,  and  the  conclusion  was  reached  in  the  same  way  that  this  "Chris- 
tian nation"  conclusion  was  reached. 

In  the  legal  and  analytical  discussion  which  was  carried  on  over  the 
decision,  the  keynote  was  the  proposition  that  "the  right  of  property 
in  a  slave  is  distinctly  and  expressly  affirmed  in  the  Constitution." 
This  was  a  queer  proposition  to  make,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  "neither 
the  word  '  slave  '  nor  '  slavery  '  is  to  be  found  in  the  Constitution,  nor  the 
word  'property  '  even,  in  any  connection  with  language  alluding  to  the 
tilings  slave  or  slaver}-."  But  the  court  made  the  proposition,  and  sup- 
ported it  by  "argument  "  built  up  from  the  "  history  of  every  European 
nation,"  the  colonies,  the  several  States,  Chancellor  Kent,  and  the  per- 
version of  the  Declaration  of  Independence;  and  then  upon  all  this  and 
as  the  connecting  link,  deciding  that  all  these  other  documents  and  the 
Constitution  have  all  one  language  and  one  meaning;  and  then  from 


THE  DECISIONS   OF  1S',G  AND   LW2.  797 

this  reaching  the  grand  climax  and  conclusion  tliat  "  the  right  of  prop- 
erty in  a  slave  is  distinctly  and  expressly  affirmed  in  the  Constitution," 
and  that  persons  of  the  African  "race  were  "so  far  inferior"  to  the 
white  race  "that  they  had  no  rights  which  a  white  man  was  bound  to 
respect;  and  that  a  negro  might  justly  and  lawfully  be  reduced  to  slavery 
for  his  benefit."  This  all  sounds  singular  enough  now,  and  to  some  peo- 
ple it  sounded  surprisingly  singular  then;  but  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  actually  made  those  singular  propositions,  and  rendered 
its  official  decision  accordingly.  And  yet  that  decision  and  those 
propositions  were  no  more  surprisingly  singular,  than  is  in  truth  this 
"Christian  nation"  decision,  and  in  fact  hardly  so  much  so  as  is  this; 
for  slavery  was  not  in  specific  terms  excluded  from  the  cognizance  of 
the  national  authority  as  is  religion,  and  especially  the  Christian  relig- 
ion, by  the,  irordx  of  the  Constitution,  and  the  supreme  la/r. 

Those  propositions,  the  arguments  by  which  in  the  opinion  of  the 
court  they  were  sustained,  and  the  decision  which  was  rendered  ac- 
cordingly, were  afiirmed  and  defended  by  a  large  number  of  people. 
They  were  denied  and  opposed  by  another  large  number.  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  was  the  champion  of  the  decision  and  of  those  who  maintained 
its  rightfulness.  Abraham  Lincoln  was  the  leader  of  those  who  denied 
and  opposed  the  decision,  its  propositions,  and  the  arguments  by  which 
it  was  sought  to  be  sustained.  Those  who  opposed  it  were  charged  by 
the  other  side  with  "resistance  to  the  decision;"  were  denounced  as 
"the  enemies  of  the  Constitution;"  as  aiming  "a  deadly  blow  to  our 
whole  representative  system  of  government;"  "the  enemies  of  the  su- 
premacy of  the  laws;"  and  the  foes  of  governmental  order  in  placing 
"all  our  rights  and  liberties  at  the  mercy  of  passion,  anarchy,  and 
violence." 

From  the  history  of  the  making  of  the  Constitution,  and  from  the 
declarations  and  express  purposes  of  those  who  made  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  and  the  national  Constitution, —  from  the  plain  words 
and  public  acts  of  -Jefferson,  Madison,  and  Washington, —  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  decision  showed  conclusively  that  the  "assumed  his- 
torical facts  "cited  by  the  court  "  were  not  really  true,"  were  really 
"not  facts  at  all  "  as  used  by  the  court;  that  the  decision  was  inac- 
curate in  the  historical  statements  cited,  and  "very  much  more  inac- 
curate by  the  suppression  of  statements  that  really  belong  to  the 
history."  They  therefore  maintained  that  "It  is  not  resistance,  it  is 
not  factious,  it  is  not  even  disrespectful,  to  treat  it  as  not  having  yet 
quite  established  a  settled  doctrine  for  the  country."  They  declared, 
"We  think  the  Dred  Scott  decision  erroneous.  We  know  that  the  court 
has  overruled  its  own  decisions,  and  we  shall  do  what  we  can  to  have 
it  overrule  this.  We  offer  no  resistance  to  it."  "  Somebody  has  to 
reverse  that  decison,  since  it  was  made,  and  we  mean  to  reverse  it,  and 
we  mean  to  do  it  peaceably."  The  court  did  not  reverse  its  decision. 


798  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

But  in  the  war,  and  in  the  Fourteenth  .and  Fifteenth  Amendments  to 
the  Constitution,  THE  PEOPLE  did  reverse  that  decision. 

Another  argument  used  by  those  who  supported  the  decision,  and 
especially  by  those  who  really  sympathized  with  it,  but  who  had  not  the 
courage  openly  to  take  their  stand  upon  it  and  support  it,  by  which 
they  supported  it  in  all  its  effects  and  purposes  through  seeking  to  allay 
all  suspicion  of  it,  was  by  insisting  on  a  distinction  —  Lincoln  pro- 
nounced it  a  "quibble" — between  the  words  "dicta"  and  "decision." 
They  pleaded  that  only  that  portion  of  the  court's  discussion  that 
applied  directly  and  definitely  to  the  case  of  Dred  Scott  as  it  was  before 
the  court,  and  that  decided  Ids  status  —  this  only  was  the  decision; 
while  all  the  rest  was  obiter  dicta,  mere  passing  remarks,  immaterial, 
and  of  no  force  or  authority.  This  indeed  was  altogether  a  quibble  ; 
for  the  very  things  that  these  persons  pleaded  were  dicta  only,  were  the 
very  things  wherein  lay  all  the  mischief.  In  that  part  it  was  where  the 
arguments  were  made,  the  conclusions  reached,  and  the  principles  recog- 
nized and  established,  which  threatened  all  the  danger  to  the  country 
that  was  seen  and  feared  by  the  opponents  of  the  decision.  And  it  was 
upon  these  very  things  that  Lincoln  and  his  party  made  their  fight  from 
beginning  to  end.  The  mere  deciding  that  Dred  Scott  and  his  family 
were  slaves,  and  had  no  standing  in  a  court  of  the  United  States,  and 
must  remain  slaves,  was  the  smallest  part  of  the  decision  as  compared 
with  the  propositions  announced  and  the  principle  established  in  the 
discussion  of  the  question,  and  which  these  secret  partisans  sought  to 
cover  up  under  the  quibble  that  all  this  was  mere  dicta. 

This  point  is  made  clear  in  Lincoln's  speech  at  Columbus,  Ohio, 
September,  1859,  in  these  words:  — 

"  That  decision  lays  down  principles,  which,  if  pushed  to  their  log- 
ical conclusion,  would  decide  that  the  constitutions  of  free  States,  for- 
bidding slavery,  are  themselves  unconstitutional.  Mark  me,  I  do  not 
say  the  judges  said  this,  and  let  no  man  say  I  affirm  the  judges  used 
these  words.  I  only  say,  It  is  my  opinion  that  what  they  did  say,  if 
pressed  to  its  logical  conclusion,  will  inevitably  result  thus.  ...  So  be- 
lieving, to  prevent  that  incidental  consummation  is  the  original  and 
chief  purpose  of  the  Republican  organization.''  "In  my  judgment 
there  is  no  avoiding  that  result,  save  the  people  see  that  constitutions 
are  better  construed  than  our  Constitution  is  construed  in  that  decision. 
They  must  take  care  that  it  is  more  faithfully  and  truly  carried  out 
than  it  is  there  expounded.  .  .  .  Take  it  just  as  it  stands-,  and  apply  it 
as  a  principle;  extend  and  apply  that  principle  elsewhere,  and  consider 
where  it  will  lead  you.  ...  I  say,  if  this  principle  is  established,  .  .  . 
when  this  is  done,  where  this  doctrine  prevails,  the  miners  and  sappers 
will  have  formed  public  opinion  for  the  slave-trade.  They  will  then  be 
ready  for  Jeff.  Davis,  and  Stephens,  and  other  leaders  of  that  company, 
to  sound  the  bugle  for  the  revival  of  the  slave-trade,  for  the  second  Dred 
Scott  decision,  for  the  flood  of  slavery  to  be  poured  over  the  free  States, 
while  we  shall  be  here  tied  down,  and  helpless,  and  run  over  like 
sheep." 


THE  DECISIONS    OF  1856   AND   1892.  799 

The  other  side  confessed  that  if  the  principle  were  admitted,  then 
this  result  might  follow,  and  to  escape  this  dangerous  conclusion,  they 
turned  all  that  part  of  the  decision  into  mere  dicta.  This  subterfuge 
Lincoln  exposed  as  follows:  — 

"  There  is  no  sort  of  question  that  the  Supreme  Court  has  decided 
that  it  is  the  right  of  the  slave-holder  to  take  his  slave  and  hold  him  in 
the  territory:  and  saying  this,  Judge  Douglas  himself  admits  the  con- 
clusion. He  says,  If  this  is  so,  this  consequence  will  follow;  and  be- 
cause this  consequence  would  follow,  his  argument  is:  '  The  decision 
cannot,  therefore,  be  that  way.  ...  It  might  be,  if  it  were  not  for  the 
extraordinary  consequences  of  spoiling  my  humbug.'  "  — Id. 

Thus  the  original  organization  of  the  Republican  party;  the  political 
campaign  in  which  Lincoln  was  made  president  of  the  United  States; 
the  four  years'  war  of  the  Rebellion;  and  the  Fourtee-nth  and  Fifteenth 
Amendments  to  the  Constitution  —  the  whole  of  this  ten  years  of  the 
most  critical  history  of  the  nation  —  was  carried  through  upon  that 
part  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  and  the  logic  of  that  part  of  the  decis- 
ion, which  in  the  quibble  was  pronounced  mere  dicta  and  not  pertinent 
nor  material  to  the  question  in  issue  before  the  court.  And  this  same 
quibble  between  the  words  "dicta"  and  "decision"  is  now  sought  to 
be  established  by  the  sympathizers  with  a  religious  despotism,  as  a  valid 
distinction  with  reference  to  this  "Christian  nation  "  decision.  And 
this  with  the  purpose  of  silencing  opposition  to  it.  And  when  this 
is  done,  where  this  doctrine  prevails,  the  miners  and  sappers  will  have 
formed  public  opinion  for  a  religious  despotism.  They  will  then  be 
ready  for  Gibbons,  Ireland,  McAllister,  George,  and  other  leaders  of 
that  companyto  sound  the  bugle  for  a  revival  of  religious  despotism, 
for  the  second  Christian  nation  decision,  for  the  flood  of  persecution  to 
be  poured  over  the  nation,  while  we  shall  be  here  tied  down,  and  help- 
less, and  run  over  like  sheep.  This  is  the  situation  to-day  under  this 
decision  as  certainly  as  it  was  the  situation  in  1859  under  the  Dred 
Scott  decision.  So  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  there  is  not  only  .a 
complete  parallel  between  the  argument,  the  proofs,  the  conclusion, 
and  the  principle  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision  and  those  of  this  "Chris- 
tian nation"  decision;  but  there  is  also  a  complete  parallel  between 
the  position  and  the  course  of  the  sympathizers  with  the  Dred  Scott 
decision  and  the  position  and  course  of  the  sympathizers  with  this 
"Christian  nation  "  decision. 

As  certainly  as  the  principle  recognized  and  established  in  the  Dred 
Scott  decision  carried  in  it  the  fact  and  all  the  consequences  of  the  civil 
despotism  which  Abraham  Lincoln  clearly  saw  and  uncompromisingly 
opposed,  so  certainly  in  principle  this  "Christian  nation  "  decision  car- 
ries in  itself  the  fact  and  all  the  consequences  of  the  religious  despot- 
ism in  the  living  likeness  of  the  f>apacy,  which  we  have  pointed  out, 
which  we  clearly  see,  and  which  we  uncompromisingly  oppose.  And 
59 


800  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS. 

in  our  opposition  to  this  we  say  with  Abraham  Lincoln  in  his  opposi- 
tion to  that,  "We  have  to  fight  this  battle  upon  principle,  and  upon 
principle  alone.  .  .  .  So  I  hope  those  with  whom  I  am  surrounded  have 
principle  enough  to  nerve  themselves  for  the  task,  and  leave  nothing 
undone  that  can  fairly  be  done,  to  bring  about  the  right  result. "- 
Speech,  at  Springfield,  III.,  July  17,  1858. 

There  is  another  point  in  parallel  that  is  well  worth  noticing, 
though  it  is  only  indirectly  connected  with  the  Ured  Scott  Decision. 
Lincoln  always  insisted  that  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise 
was  to  establish  a  principle  to  be  used  in  the  future  for  "the  planting 
of  slavery  wherever  in  the  wide  world  local  and  unorganized  opposition 
could  not  prevent  it  ;  "  and  therefore  earnestly  advocated  its  restora- 
tion. Yet  he  said,  "Some  men,  .  .  .  who  condemn  the  repeal  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise,  nevertheless  hesitate  to  go  for  its  restoration, 
lent  they  be  thrown  in  company  with  THE  ABOLITIONIST."  The  other  side 
also  diligently  used  this  argument  as  a  scarecrow  to  prevent  as  many  as 
possible  of  the  timid  ones  from  acting  upon  their  real  convictions. 

Even  so  now  there  are  many  people  who  in  principle  and  from  con- 
viction are  opposed  to  this  "Christian  nation  "  decision,  and  all  the 
purposes  of  this  combination  to  secure  national  religious  legislation 
and  the  full  establishment  of  a  religious  despotism  ;  yet  they  hesitate 
to  act  openly  and  positively  in  opposition  lest  they  be  thrown  in  company 
icitJi  THE  ADVENTISTS.  And  those  who  are  urging  on  this  religious 
despotism  are  diligently  using  this  argument  to  prejudice  the  idea  of 
opposition  beforehand,  and  as  a  scarecrow  to  frighten  the  timid  ones. 

Lincoln's  words  to  those  persons  in  that  day  are  ours  to  these  in 
this  day:  "Will  they  allow  me  to  tell  them,  good-humoredly,  that  I 
think  this  [hesitation  to  show  their  opposition]  is  very  silly.  STAND 
WITH  ANYBODY  THAT  STANDS  RIGHT.  Stand  with  him  while 
he  is  right,  and  part  with  him  when  he  goes  wrong.  ...  To  desert 
such  ground  because  of  any  company  ...  is  to  be  less  than  a  man  — 
less  than  an  American." — Speech,  at  Peoria,  III.,  October  10,  1854.  And 
on  this  question,  before  us  to-day,  to  desert  such  ground  becauSe  of  any 
company,  is  to  be  less  than  a  man  —  less  than  an  American  —  less  than 
a  Christian. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 


THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

IT  is  not  only  too  late  to  avoid  the  consequences  of  that 
"Christian  nation1'  decision  by  denying  the  principle, 
because  the  principle  is  established,  and  all  the  consequences 
are  in  the  principle  ;  but  it  is  even  more  than  doubly  too  late, 
because  the  consequences  of  the  principle  have  already  be- 
come a  fixture  in  the  legislative  precedents  and  procedure 
of  the  nation. 

The  great  religious  combination  for  political  purposes 
whose  history  we  have  traced  in  Chapters  XXV  and  XXVI, 
has  already  seized  upon  it  and  made  it  to  do  service  in  se- 
curing what  the  National  Reform  Association  has  always 
been  aiming  at,  that  is,  the  establishment  of  Sunday  as  the 
national  Sabbath.  This  is  the  one  thing  that  they  had  in 
view  above  all  other  things,  in  their  efforts  to  obtain  an 
amendment  to  the  Constitution  declaring  this  a  Christian 
nation.  And  when  the  Supreme  Court  unanimously  de- 
clared that  "this  is  a  Christian  nation"  even  now,  and  that 
this  is  the  "meaning"  of  the  Constitution  as  it  is  now,  they 
were  only  too  glad  to  have  and  to  use  this  decision  as  the 
basis  of  their  demand  upon  Congress  that  Sunday  should 
be  set  up  as  the  national  Sabbath  by  an  act  of  the  national 
legislature. 

One  of  the  very  first  uses  that  was  ever  made  of  that 
"Christian  nation"  decision  was  when,  in  the  month  of 
April,  1892,  the  president  of  the  American  Sabbath  Union 
took  it  in  his  hand,  and  went  before  committees  of  the 

[801] 


802  TUB   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

United  States  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives,  recited 
its  '"argument,"  and  demanded  the  closing  of  the  World's 
Fair  on  Sunday,  by  Congress,  "because  this  is  a  Christian 
nation." 

The  Pearl  of  Days,  the  official  organ  of  the  American 
Sabbath  Union,  May  7,  1892,  arguing  for  Sunday  legis- 
lation by  Congress,  said  that  this  decision  — 

•'Establishes  clearly  the  fact  that  our  government  is  Christian.  Tim 
decision  is  vital  to  tlie  Sunday  question  in  nil  its  aspects,  and  places  that 
question  among  the  most  important  issues  now  before  the  American 
people.  .  .  .  And  this  important  decision  rests  upon  the  fundamental 
principle  that  religion  is  imbedded  in  the  organic  structure  of  the 
American  government —  a  religion  that  recognizes,  and  is  bound  to  main- 
tain, Sunday  as  a  day  for  rest  and  worship." 

The  Christian  Statesman,  which  has  always  been  the  offi- 
cial organ  of  the  National  Reform  Association,  and  which 
was  then  the  mouthpiece  of  the  whole  combination,  in  the  is- 
sue of  May  21,  1892,  said  :  - 

"  'Christianity  is  the  law  of  the  land.'  'This  is  a  Christian  nation.' 
-  U.  8.  Supreme  Court,  February  20,  1802.  The  Christian  church, 
therefore,  has  rights  in  this  country.  Among  these  is  the  right  to  one 
day  in  seven  protected  from  the  assaults  of  greed,  the  god  of  this  world, 
that  it  may  be  devoted  to  worship  of  the  God  of  heaven  and  earth." 

From  December,  1888,  to  December,  1891,  the  National 
Reform  combination  had  tried  repeatedly  to  secure  the  pas- 
sage of  some  sort  of  bill  by  Congress,  requiring  the  observ- 
ance of  Sunday.  They  knew  that  any  such  act  of  Congress 
would  be  unconstitutional.  The  leading  National  Reformers 
had  so  declared  continuously  for  more  than  twenty-five 
years.  But  that  made  no  difference  to  them,  they  were  de- 
termined to  have  it,  even  though  it  were  unconstitutional. 
They  tried  to  secure  it  by  a  national  bill,  and  failed.  They 
then  tried  to  secure  it  by  a  bill  relating  only  to  the  District 
of  Columbia,  in  order  that  if  successful  they  might  use  this 
as  a  lever  to  secure  the  passage  of  their  coveted  national  law. 


"PETITIONING"  BY  THREATS.  803 

But  in  this  also  they  failed.  They  desired  the  recognition  of 
the  principle  of  religion  in  legislation  by  Congress  ;  and  they 
cared  not  in  what  shape  it  might  be  brought  about,  nor  how 
slightly  the  principle  was  recognized,  just  so  it  was  done. 
As  one  of  their  number  told  congressional  committees  and 
the  public  repeatedly  :  "  We  will  take  a  quarter  of  a  loaf,  half 
a  loaf,  or  a  whole  loaf.  If  the  government  should  do  noth- 
ing more  than  forbid  the  opening  of  the  post-offices  at  church 
hours,  it  would  be  a  national  tribute  to  the  value  of  religion, 
and  would  lead  to  something  more  satisfactory." 

Having  repeatedly  failed  to  get  what  they  wanted,  by  di- 
rect legislation,  they  welcomed  the  proposition  of  a  con- 
gressional appropriation  in  aid  of  the  World's  Columbian 
Exposition,  as  the  means  of  securing  indirectly  that  which 
they  had  failed  to  accomplish  directly.  They  therefore 
unanimously  declared  in  favor  of  a  governmental  appropri- 
ation of  $5,000,000  in  aid  of  the  Exposition,  but  coupled  in- 
separably with  the  provision  that  the  gates  of  the  Exposition 
should  be  closed  on  "the  Lord's  day,"  "  the  Christian  Sab- 
bath," "the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly  called  Sunday." 
They  first  petitioned  Congress  according  to  this  scheme  ;  but 
as  Congress  seemed  to  be  slow  in  responding,  they  soon  pro- 
ceeded to  add  threats  to  their  "petitions."  And  these 
threats  were  of  such  a  nature  that  more  than  one  of  the  Sena- 
tors openly  in  the  Senate  rebuked  them  as  "an  abuse  of  the 
right  of  petition." 

This  however  did  not  cause  those  "petitioners"  to  cease 
their  threats.  The  National  Reform  Bureau,  whose  head- 
quarters were  at  Pittsburg,  Pa.,  sent  out  to  pulpits  all  over 
the  land,  a  form  of  threatening  resolution  to  be  adopted  by 
the  respective  churches,  and.  sent  up  to  the  senators  and  rep- 
resentatives in  Congress.  And  here  is  a  true  copy  of  that 
threatening  resolution  :  — 

"  Resolved,  That  we  do  hereby  pledge  ourselves  and  each  other,  that 
we  will  from  this  time  henceforth  refuse  to  vote  for  or  support  for  any 


804          THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

office  or  position  of  trust,  any  member  of  Congress,  either  senator  or 
representative,  who  shall  vote  for  any  further  aid  of  any  kind  to  the 
World's  Fair,  except  on  conditions  named  in  these  resolutions."  l 

This  particular  resolution  was  sent  up  by  certain  Presby- 
terian churches  of  the  State  of  New  York ;  but  with  slight 
variations,  or  none  at  all,  the  like  resolution  was  sent  up  by 
different  churches  throughout  the  country.  And  in  all  cases 
the  "conditions  named"  were  that  the  gates  of  the  Exposi- 
tion should  be  closed  on  "the  Sabbath,"  "the  Christian 
Sabbath,"  or  "the  Lord's  day,"  according  as  different 
churches  chose  differently  to  express  their  thought  as  to  the 
best  name  for  Sunday. 

Under  the  influence  of  these  resolutions,  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States  surrendered  to  the  dictate  of  the  churches, 
and  did  for  them  what  the  leaders  and  lobbyists  of  this  com- 
bination knew  to  be  an  unconstitutional  thing.  And  the 
matter  was  treated  by  Congress  in  such  a  way  as  to  preclude 
the  charitable  supposition  that  the  members  did  not  know 
that  it  was  unconstitutional,  even  though  its  unconstitu- 
tionally had  not  been  definitely  pointed  out  to  them.  The 
question  was  treated  as  religious  and  religious  only. 

It  is  true  that  the  Expotition  was  not  closed  all  the  time 
on  Sunday  (it  was  closed  three  or  four  Sundays);  but  this 
does  not  affect  the  action  of  Congress.  Besides,  in  the  cases 
and  decisions  of  the  courts  by  which  the  Exposition  was 
opened  on  Sunday,  the  question  of  the  constitutionality  or 
unconstitutionally  of  the  action  of  Congress  was  not  con- 
sidered at  all.  The  whole  procedure  was  on  other  points 
exclusively.  The  non-enforcement  of  an  act  of  Congress,  or 
any  other  law,  does  not  affect  the  act  itself.  As  a  matter  of 
legislation,  therefore,  and  of  fact,  this  action  of  Congress 
stands  just  as  though  the  Exposition  had  been  closed  all  the 
time. 

That  particular  phase  of  the  subject  which  produced  the 
legislation  to  close  the  "World's  Columbian  Exposition  on  Sun- 

1  Congressional  fiecord,  May  25,  1892,  page  5144. 


A  SENATORIAL  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.         805 

day,  was  introduced  in  the  United  States  Senate  by  Senator 
Quay,  July  10,  1892.  He  did  it  by  offering  an  amendment 
to  the  appropriation  bill,  requiring  that  provision  should  be 
made  "  by  the  proper  authority  for  the  closing  of  the  Expo- 
sition on  the  Sabbath  day."  With  this  he  also  sent  up  to 
the  secretary  of  the  Senate  a  Bible  with  the  fourth  com- 
mandment marked  in  brackets,  and  had  that  commandment 
read  by  the  secretary  as  giving  the  reasons  for  this  legisla- 
tion. This  introduced  the  legislation  with  a  positive  relig- 
ious character,  and  this  idea  was  never  forsaken  from  begin- 
ning to  end.  The  chaplain  of  the  Senate,  who  took  an 
active  interest  in  the  matter  throughout,  said  of  the  discus- 
sion in  the  Senate  :  — 

"During  this  debate  you  might  have  imagined  yourself  in  a  general 
council  or  assembly  or  synod  or  conference,  so  pronounced  was  one 
Senator  after  another." a 

As  these  are  all  ecclesiastical  terms,  it  is  evident  that  in 
the  mind  of  the  chaplain,  the  Senate,  for  this  occasion  at 
least,  had  transformed  itself  into  an  ecclesiastical  body.  Nor 
indeed  is  the  chaplain  alone  in  this  view  ;  from  the  speeches 
as  they  appear  in  the  Congressional  Record,  it  is  plain  that 
some  at  least  of  the  senators  were  impressed  with  this 
notion  too. 

Senator  Hawley  said  :  — 

"Everybody  knows  what  the  foundation  is.  It  is  founded  in  relig- 
ious belief." 

And  Senator  Peffer  said  of  it :  — 

"To-day  we  are  engaged  in  a  theological  discussion  concerning  the 
observance  of  the  first  day  of  the  week." 

As  Senator  Colquitt  was  a  National  Reformer  of  years' 
standing,  nothing  else  was  to  be  expected  of  him,  and  he 
fully  sustained  this  character  in  his  speech,  about  half  of  which 
was  made  up  from  extracts  from  a  sermon  by  Father  Hya- 
cinthe,  Old  Roman  Catholic  of  France.  The  rest  of  his 

aNew  York  Independnit,  July  28,  1892. 


806          THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

speech  was  National  Reform  sentiment  of  his  own  manafact- 
ure.  Altogether  it  was  of  such  a  sort  that  he  himself  began 
to  see  how  incongruous  it  was  in  that  place,  and  halted  with 
these  words :  — 

"  But  I  shall  continue  this  no  farther,  Mr.  President,  for  it  may  to 
some  sound  like  cant,  like  preaching,  as  though  we  were  undertaking  to 
clothe  ourselves  in  over-righteous  habiliments,  and  pretend  to  be  better 
than  other  men."3 

In  speaking  further,  Senator  Hawley  greatly  regretted 
that  he  was  not  enough  of  an  ecclesiastic  to  do  justice  to  the 
subject,  and  exclaimed  :  — 

"I  wish,  Mr.  President,  that  I  were  the  most  eloquent  clergyman, 
the  most  eloquent  of  those  staunch  old  sturdy  divines  who  have  honored 
American  citizenship,  as  well  as  American  Christianity,  that  I  might  give 
something  more  than  this  feeble  expression  of  my  belief  in  the  serious 
importance  of  this  vote."5 

And  because  he  could  not  have  his  wish  to  be,  for  the 
occasion,  "the  most  eloquent  clergymen,"  "  the  most  elo- 
quent of  those  staunch  old  sturdy  divines  "  (such  as  John 
Cotton,  and  John  Davenport,  and  Cotton  Mather,  perhaps), 
he  did  what  evidently  he  counted  the  next  best  thing,  and 
presented  the  views  of  Archbishop  Ireland,  Archbishop 
Gross,  and  Archbishop  Riordan,  of  the  Catholic  Church,  all 
the  bishops  of  the  Episcopalian  Church,  and  most,  if  not  all, 
the  bishops  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  both  North 
and  South. 

This  is  evidence  enough  to  demonstrate  that  the  question 
was  treated  altogether  and  consciously  as  a  religious  or 
ecclesiastical  one.  It  is  in  order,  and  it  is  important  too, 
now  to  present  the  evidence  that  this  constitutionally  for- 
bidden question  was  taken  up  and  considered  and  acted 
upon,  out  of  deference  to  the  demands  and  threats  of  the 
combined  churches. 

3  Congressional  Record,  Fifty-second  Congress,  p.  6755. 
5  Congressional  Record,  July  12,  1892,  p.  6700. 


THE  WORDS  OF  THE  SURRENDER.  807 

In  the  Senate,  the  two  most  influential  advocates  of  the 
measure  were  Senators  Hawley  and  Hiscock.  And  Senator 
Hiscock  set  forth  the  matter  thus  :; — 

"If  I  had  charge  of  this  amendment  in  the  interest  of  the  Columbian 
Exposition,  I  would  icrite  tfie  provision  for  the  closure  in  any  form  that  the 
religious  sentiment  of  the  country  demands,  and  not  stand  here  hesitating 
or  quibbling  about  it.  Rather  than  let  the  public  sentiment  against  the 
Exposition  being  opened  on  Sunday  be  re-enforced  by  the  opposition  in 
the  other  house  against  any  legislation  of  this  kind  in  the  interest  of  the 
Exposition,  I  say  to  the  junior  senator  from  Illinois  [Mr.  Palmer],  he 
would  better  yield  to  this  sentiment,  and  not  let  it  go  out  to  the  country  that 
there  is  the  slightest  doubt  that  if  this  money  shall  be  appropriated,  the 
Exposition  will  be  closed  on  Sunday.  ...  If  I  were  interested  in  this 
measure,  as  I  might  be  interested  if  it  were  located  in  my  own  State,  / 
should  make  this  closure  provision  satisfactory  to  those  petitioners  who  have 
memorialized  us  against  the  desecration  of  the  Lord's  day.  ...  I 
would  not  leave  it  uncertain  whether  the  government  might  engage  in 
business  or  not  upon  the  Sabbath  day."  6 

Senator  Vest,  though  professedly  speaking  for  an  open 
Fair,  was  constrained  to  say  :  — 

"If  I  abhorred  anything,  it  would  be  any  public  act  of  mine  which 
would  say  to  the  honest,  religious  people  of  the  United  States,  '  I  am  pre- 
pared to  flout  your  opinions,  to  entirely  disregard  them,  and  to  stamp 
upon  them  my  disapprobation  by  giving  a  vote  directly  in  conflict  with 
what  you  have  asked.'"  7 

Senator  Hawley,  however,  was  the  most  outspoken  of 
all.  He  first  stated  that  "there  are  more  than  13,000,000 
people  recorded  as  members  of  churches  in  the  United 
States."  He  then  added  to  these  "attendants,"  "asso- 
ciates," and  "sympathizers,"  "who  go  to  church  or  send 
their  wives  and  children,  and  subscribe  for  it,  and  have  a 
profound  respect  for  it,  whether  they  believe  in  it  or  not,"  and 
thus  he  made  up  the  number  of  "from  forty  to  fifty  mill- 
ions," who  "have  more  or  less  of  religious  profession  or 

6  Congressional  Record,  July  13,  1892,  p.  6755. 

7/d.,  July  12,  p.  6697.  Thomas  Jefferson  and  James  Madison  would  have 
said  it.  They  did  say  it  in  their  day. 


808          THE  CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.—  CONCLUDED. 

sympathy  "  in  this  country,  and  then  upon  all  this  argued 
thus : — 

"There  is  no  use  in  endeavoring  to  escape  responsibility.  If  the 
Senate  to-day  decides  that  it  will  not  close  that  Exposition  on  Sunday, 
the  Exposition  will  be  opened  on  that  day,  and  you  will  have  offended 
more  than  40,000,000  of  people  —  seriously  and  solemnly  offended  them. 
No  wise  statesman  and  monarch  of  modern  times,  no  satrap  of  Rome, 
would  have  thought  it  wise  to  fly  in  the  face  of  a  profound  conviction 
of  the  people  he  governed,  no  matter  if  he  thought  it  a  profound  error. 
It  is  not  wise  statesmanship  to  do  it.  .  .  .  Now,  if  gentlemen  repudiate 
this,  if  they  desire  to  reject  it,  if  they  deny  that  this  is  in  the  true  sense 
of  the  word  a  religious  nation,  I  should  like  to  see  the  disclaimer  put  in 
white  and  black,  and  proposed  by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States. 
Write  it.  How  would  you  write  it  ?  How  would  you  deny  that  from 
the  foundation  of  the  country,  through  every  fiber  of  their  being,  this 
people  has  been  a  religious  people  ?  Word  it,  if  you  dare  ;  advocate  it, 
if  you  dare.  How  MANY  WHO  VOTED  FOR  IT  WOULD  EVER  COME 
BACK  HERE  AGAIN?  — None,  I  hope."8 

It  was  the  same  way  in  the  House.  A  dispatch  from 
Washington  to  the  Chicago  Daily  Post,  April  9,  1892,  gave 
the  following  from  an  interview  with  a  member  of  the 
House  Committee  on  the  World's  Fair :  — 

"The  reason  we  shall  vote  for  it  is,  I  will  confess  to  you,  a  fear  that 
unless  we  do  so,  the  church  folks  will  get  together  and  knife  us  at  the 
polls  ;  and  —  well  you  know  we  all  want  to  come  back,  and  we  can''t 
afford  to  take  any  risks." 

"Do  you  think  it  will  pass  the  House  ?" 

"Yes;  and  the  Senate  too.  We  are  all  in  the  same  boat.  lam 
sorry  for  those  in  charge  of  the  Fair ;  but  self-preservation  is  the  first 
law  of  nature,  and  that  is  all  there  is  about  it." 

At  this  subservient  attitude  of  Congress,  the  Sunday-law 
managers  chuckled  with  great  satisfaction.  In  the  Union 
Signal,  October  20,  1892,  there  was  published  an  editorial 
interview  with  Joseph  Cook,  on  Congress  and  Sunday- 
closing  of  the  World's  Fair,  in  which  occurs  the  following 
passage  from  Mr.  Cook  :  — 

"  In  Boston  the  first  question  asked  a  stranger  is,  '  Have  you  written 
a  book  ? '  in  New  York,  '  How  much  are  you  worth  ? '  in  Chicago,  '  How 

8  Congressional  Record,  July  12,  1892,  p.  6700,  and  July  13,  p.  6759. 


"THE  SABBATH  DAT."  809 

much  do  you  expect  to  be  worth  ?'  in  Washington,  'Do  you  hope  to  be 
re-elected?'  The  American  people  have  convinced  Congress  that  this 
latter  question  is  of  great  and  growing  importance  in  connection  with 
votes  on  Sunday-closing." 

And  so  the  threats  of  the  churches  were  not  in  vain. 
For  fear  that  they  could  not  "come  back  here  again," 
United  States  senators  and  representatives  in  Congress 
violated  the  Constitution  ;  entered  the  field  of  religion  ; 
discussed  a  religious  question  ;  committed  the  government 
of  the  United  States  to  the  decision  of  a  religious  contro- 
versy ;  and  assumed  the  prerogative  of  interpreter  of  the  di- 
vine law  for  the  people  of  the  United  States. 

That  this  may  be  seen  the  more  clearly,  let  us  look  again 
at  the  official  proceedings.  There  we  find  the  following  ac- 
count :  — 

" Mr.  Quay. —  On  page  122,  line  13,  after  the  word  'act,'  I  move  to 
insert,  '  and  that  provision  has  been  made  by  the  proper  authority  for 
the  closing  of  the  Exposition  on  the  Sabbath  day.' 

"The  reasons  for  the  amendment  I  will  send  to  the  desk  to  be 
read.  The  secretary  will  have  the  kindness  to  read  from  the  Book  of 
Law  I  send  to  the  desk,  the  part  enclosed  ia  brackets. 

"  The  Vice- President. —  The  part  indicated  will  be  read. 

"The  secretary  read  as  follows  :  — 

"  '  Remember  the  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy  ;  six  days  shall  thou 
labor  and  do  all  thy  work  ;  but  the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of  the 
Lord  thy  God  ;  in  it  thou  shalt  not  do  any  work,  thou,  nor  thy  son,  nor 
thy  daughter,  thy  manservant,  nor  thy  maidservant,  nor  thy  cattle,  nor 
thy  stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates  ;  for  in  six  days  the  Lord  made 
heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that  in  them  is,  and  rested  the  seventh 
day  ;  wherefore  the  Lord  blessed  the  Sabbath  day,  and  hallowed  it.'"  10 

The  foregoing  is  all  that  was  said  or  done  in  relation  to 
the  question  that  day.  The  next  legislative  day,  however, 
the  question  was  taken  up  and  discussed.  The  debate  was 
opened  by  Senator  Manderson,  of  Nebraska,  who  used  the 
following  language  :  — 

"The  language  of  this  amendment  is,  that  the  Exposition  shall  be 
closed  on  the  'Sabbath  day.'  I  submit  that  if  the  senator  from  Pennsyl- 

10  Congressional  Record,  July  10,  1892,  p.  6614. 


810          THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

vania  desires  that  the  Exposition  shall  be  closed  upon  Sunday,  this  lan- 
guage will  not  necessarily  meet  that  idea.  .  .  . 

"  The  word  '  Sabbath  day '  simply  means  that  it  is  a  rest  day,  and  it 
may  be  Saturday  or  Sunday,  and  it  would  be  subject  to  the  discretion  of 
those  who  will  manage  this  Exposition,  whether  they  should  close  the 
Exposition  on  the  last  day  of  the  week,  in  conformity  with  that  observ- 
ance which  is  made  by  the  Israelites  and  the  Seventh-day  Baptists,  or 
should  close  it  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  generally  known  as  the 
Christian  Sabbath.  It  certainly  seems  to  me  that  this  amendment  should 
be  adopted  by  the  senator  from  Pennsylvania,  and,  if  he  proposes  to  close 
this  Exposition,  that  it  should  be  closed  on  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
commonly  called  Sunday.  .  .  . 

''Therefore  I  offer  an  amendment  to  the  amendment,  which  I  hope 
may  be  accepted  by  the  senator  from  Pennsylvania,  to  strike  out  the 
words  'Exposition  on  the  Sabbath  day,'  and  insert  'mechanical  portion 
of  the  Exposition  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly  called 
Sunday.'  .  .  . 

"Mr.  Quay.  —  I  will  accept  the  modification  so  far  as  it  changes  the 
phraseology  of  the  amendment  proposed  by  me  in  regard  to  designating 
the  day  of  the  week  on  which  the  Exposition  shall  be  closed. 

"  The  Vice- President. —  The  senator  from  Pennsylvania  accepts  the 
modification  in  part,  but  not  in  whole.  .  .  . 

"Mr.  Harris. —  Let  the  amendment  of  the  senator  from  Pennsyl- 
vania, as  modified,  be  reported. 

"  The  Vice- President. —  It  will  be  again  reported. 

"  TJie  Chief  Clerk. —  On  page  122,  line  13,  after  the  word  'act,'  it  is 
proposed  to  amend  the  amendment  of  the  committee  by  inserting, — 

"  '  And  that  provision  has  been  made  by  the  proper  authority  for  the 
closing  of  the  Exposition  on  the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly  called 
Sunday.' "  u 

This  amendment  was  afterward  further  amended  by  the 
insertion  of  the  proviso  that  the  managers  of  the  Exposition 
should  sign  an  agreement  to  close  the  Fair  on  Sunday  before 
they  could  receive  any  of  the  appropriation  ;  but  this  which 
we  have  given  is  the  material  point. 

All  of  this  the  House  confirmed  in  its  vote,  accepting  the 
Senate  amendments.  Besides  this,  the  House  had  already, 
on  its  own  part,  by  a  vote  of  131  to  36,  decided  that  Sunday 

11  Id.,  July  12,  1892,  pp.  6694,  6695,  6701. 


CONGRESS  INTERPRETS  THE  BIBLE.  811 

is  the  "  Christian  Sabbath  ; "  and  by  a  vote  of  149  to  11  that 
the  seventh  day  is  not  the  Sabbath.  And  thus  did  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States,  at  the  dictate  of  the  churches,  not 
only  take  sides  in  a  religious  controversy,  and  discuss  and 
decide  a  religious  question,  but  put  itself  in  the  place,  and 
assumed  to  itself  the  prerogative  of  authoritative  interpreter  of 
the  divine  law  ;  for,  from  the  official  record  of  the  proceed- 
ings, there  appear  these  plain  facts  :  — 

1.  The  divine  law  was  officially  and  in  its  very  words 
adopted  as  containing  the  "reasons"  and  forming  the  basis 
of  the  legislation.     In  other  words,  the  legislation  proposed 
only  to  enforce  the  divine  law  as  quoted  from  the  Book. 

2.  Yet  those  to  whom  the  legislation  was  directed,  and 
who  were  expected  to  execute  its  provisions,  were  riot  al- 
lowed to  read  and  construe  the  divine  law  for  themselves, 
and  this  for  the  very  reason  that  there  was  a  possibility  that 
they  might  take  the  divine  word  as  it  reads,  and  as  it  was 
actually  quoted   in   the   official  proceedings,   and  shut   the 
Exposition  on  the  day  plainly  specified  in  the  divine  word, 
which  was  cited  as  the   basis  and  authority  for  the  action 
taken. 

3.  Therefore,  to  preclude  any  such  possibility,  Congress 
assumed  the  prerogative  of  official  and  authoritative  inter- 
preter of  the  divine  law,  and  declared  that  ik  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  commonly  called  Sunday,"  is  the  Sabbath  of  the 
fourth  commandment  of  the  divine  law  —  that  "•  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  commonly  called  Sunday,"  is  the  meaning  of 
the  wrord  of  the  Lord  which  says,  ' '  The  seventh  day  is  the 
Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God." 

This  is  what  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  has  done, 
and,  in  the  doing  of  it,  has  violated  every  rule  and  every 
principle  that  governs  in  the  interpretation  of  law.  A  lead- 
ing rule  for  the  interpretation  of  law,  is  this  :  — 

"  In  the  case  of  all  law,  it  is  the  intent  of  the  lawgiver  that  is  to  be 
enforced." 


812  THE   CONSPIRA  CT  8  UCCEEDS.  —  CONCL  UDED. 

What,  then,  was  the  intent  of  the  Lawgiver  when  the 
Sabbath  commandment  was  given  ?  Did  the  Lawgiver  de- 
clare, or  show  in  any  way,  his  intention?  —  He  did.  He 
declared  in  plain  words  that  the  seventh  day  is  the  one  in- 
tended to  be  observed.  Nor  did  he  leave  them  to  decide 
for  themselves  which  day  they  would  have  for  the  Sabbath. 
He  did  not  leave  it  to  the  people  to  interpret  his  law  for 
themselves,  nor  to  interpret  it  at  all.  By  three  special  acts 
every  week,  kept  up  continuously  for  forty  years,  the  Lord 
showed  his  intent  in  the  law.  The  people  were  fed  on  the 
manna  in  their  forty  years'  wanderings  between  Egypt  and 
Canaan  ;  but  on  the  seventh  day  of  the  week  no  manna  ever 
fell.  On  the  sixth  day  of  the  week  there  was  a  double  por- 
tion, and  that  which  was  gathered  on  the  sixth  day  would 
keep  over  the  seventh  day,  which  it  could  not  be  made  to 
do  on  any  other  day  of  the  week.  By  this  means  the  Law- 
giver signified  his  intent  upon  the  subject  of  the  day  men- 
tioned in  the  law  quoted  by  Congress,  and  by  keeping  it  up 
so  continuously,  and  for  so  long  a  time,  he  made  it  impos- 
sible for  the  people  then  to  mistake  his  intent,  and  has  left 
all  future  generations  who  have  the  record  of  it,  without  ex- 
cuse in  gathering  anything  else  as  his  intent  than  that  the 
seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath.  Therefore,  when  Congress 
decided  that  "the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly  called 
Sunday,"  is  the  meaning  of  the  divine  law  which  says  "the 
seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath,"  it  plainly  set  itself  in  contra- 
diction to  the  word  and  intent  of  the  Most  High. 
Another  established  rule  is  this  :  — 

"When  words  are  plain  in  a  written  law,  there  is  an  end  to  all  con- 
struction ;  they  must  be  followed."  And,  "Where  the  intent  is  plain, 
nothing  is  left  to  construction." 

Are  the  words  of  this  commandment,  quoted  by  Con- 
gress, plain  words? — They  are  nothing  else.  There  is  not 
an  obscure  nor  an  ambiguous  word  in  the  whole  command- 
ment. Then,  under  the  rule  there  is  no  room  for  any  con- 


CONGRESS  AGAINST  THE  WORD  OF  GOD.  813 

struction  ;  much  less  is  there  room  for  any  such  construction 
as  would  make  the  expression  "the  seventh  day"  mean 
"the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly  called  Sunday.7' 
Fitting  to  the  point,  the  New  Testament  has  given  us  an 
instructive  and  important  piece  of  narrative.  In  Mark 
16:1,  2,  are  these  words  :  — 

"And  when  the  Sabbath  was  past,  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Mary  the 
mother  of  James  and  Salome,  had  brought  sweet  spices,  that  they  might 
come  and  anoint  him.  And  very  early  in  the  morning,  the  first  day  of 
week,  they  came  unto  the  sepulcher  at  the  rising  of  the  sun." 

These  people  arose  very  early  in  the  morning  of  the  first 
day  of  the  week  ;  yet  the  Sabbath  was  past.  Now  Congress 
legislated  to  secure  respect  for  the  Sabbath  on  "the  first 
day  of  the  week."  Such  a  thing  can  never  be  done,  how- 
ever, because  Inspiration  has  declared  that  the  Sabbath  is 
past  before  the  first  day  of  the  week  comes.  It  matters  not 
how  early  our  illustrious  and  devout  Congress  or  anybody 
else  may  get  out  and  around  "on  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
commonly  called  Sunday,"  they  will  be  too  late  to  find  the 
Sabbath  there,  for  the  Lord  says  that  then  it  is  "past." 

And  it  is  the  Sabbath  according  to  the  commandment, 
too,  that  is'past  when  the  first  day  of  the  week  comes  —  the 
Sabbath  according  to  this  very  commandment  which  Con- 
gress has  officially  cited.  Here  is  the  record  :  — 

"  And  they  returned,  and  prepared  spices  and  ointments  ;  and  rested 
the  Sabbath  day  according  to  the  commandment.  Now  upon  the  first 
day  of  the  week,  very  early  in  the  morning,  they  came  unto  the  sepul- 
cher, bringing  the  spices  which  they  had  prepared,  and  certain  others 
with  them.  And  they  found  the  stone  rolled  away  from  the  sepulcher. 
And  they  entered  in,  and  found  not  the  body  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Luke 
23  :  56  ;  24  :  1-3. 

Here  is  the  plain  word  of  the  Lord,  stating  plainly  and 
proving  conclusively  that  "the  Sabbath  day  "  according  to 
the  very  commandment  which  Congress  has  officially  cited, 
is  the  day  before  "the  first  day  of  the  week,  commonly 
called  Sunday,"  and  that  the  Sabbath  day  according  to  this 


814          THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

commandment  is  past  before  "the  first  day  of  the  week, 
commonly  called  Sunday,"  comes  at  all,  no  matter  how 
early  they  may  get  up  the  first  day  of  the  week. 

It  is  true  that  the  churches  are  at  the  head  of  all  this, 
and  that  Congress  did  it  at  the  dictation  and  under  the 
threats  of  the  churches.  It  is  true  that  the  churches  have 
put  this  false  interpretation  upon  the  commandment,  and 
then  saddled  it  off  thus  upon  Congress.  This  is  all  true,  but 
that  does  not  relieve  Congress  from  one  whit  of  the  guilt  of 
perverting  the  law  of  the  Most  High,  of  forcing  into  that 
law  a  meaning  that  was  never  intended  to  be  there,  and  of 
putting  itself  in  the  place  of  God  and  assuming  the  office  of 
interpreter  of  his  laws.  Congress  had  no  business  to  allow 
itself  to  be  forced  into  such  a  position.  An  eminent  law 
writer  and  legal  authority  has  justly  observed  that  — 

"A  court  or  legislature  which  should  allow  a  change  of  public  sen- 
timent to  influence  it  in  giving  to  a  written  constitution  a  construction 
not  warranted  by  the  intention  of  its  founders,  would  be  justly  charge- 
able with  reckless  disregard  of  official  oath  and  public  duty."  12 

The  theologians  gave  to  the  Sabbath  commandment  a 
construction  which  was  not  in  any  sense  warranted  by  the 
intention  of  the  Author  of  the  commandment.  They  then 
went  to  Congress  and  demanded  with  threats  that  it  allow 
itself  to  be  influenced  by  these  theological  sentiments  and 
political  threats,  to  give  to  the  written  Constitution  of  the 
government  of  the  living  God  a  construction  which  is  not 
in  any  sense  warranted  by  the  intention  of  the  Founder  of 
that  Constitution.  And  our  national  Legislature  did  allow 
this  sentiment  to  influence  it  into  doing  that  very  thing. 
Such  a  thing  done  to  a  human  constitution,  an  earthly 
statute,  being  justly  chargeable  to  reckless  disregard  of 
official  oath  and  public  duty,  what  must  be  chargeable 
against  such  an  action  with  reference  to  the  divine  Constitu- 
tion and  the  heavenly  law  ?  The  national  Legislature,  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  has  allowed  the  churches  to 

12Cooley,  "  Constitutional  Limitations,"  p.  67. 


THE  SUBJECTION  OF  THE  PEOPLE.  815 

draw  it  into  the  commission  of  an  act  with  reference  to  the 
Constitution  and  laws  of  the  living  God,  which,  if  done  only 
with  the  laws  of  men,  would  be  reckless  disregard  of  official 
oath  and  public  duty.  And  both  Congress  and  the  churches 
are  without  excuse  in  the  doing  of  it. 

By  this  legislation,  at  the  dictate  of  the  churches,  Con- 
gress has  distinctly  and  definitely  put  itself  and  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  into  the  place  where  it  has 
established,  and  proposed  to  enforce,  the  observance  of  an 
institution  as  sacred,  and  as  due  to  the  Lord,  which  not 
only  the  Losd  has  neither  established  nor  required,  but 
which  is  directly  contrary  to  the  plain  word  of  the  Lord 
upon  the  subject  of  this  very  institution,  and  its  observance 
as  due  to  the  Lord.  And  in  the  doing  of  this,  Congress 
has  also  been  caused  to  assume  to  itself  the  prerogative  of 
authoritative  interpreter  of  the  Scriptures  for  the  people  of 
the  land,  and  for  all  who  come  into  the  land,  and  has  put 
itself  in  the  place  of  God,  by  authoritatively  deciding  that  an 
observance  established  and  required  by  the  State,  and  which 
it  calls  the  Lord's,  is  the  Lord's  indeed,  although  the  Lord 
plainly  declares  the  contrary. 

In  thus  submitting  to  the  dictates  of  the  churches,  and 
making  itself  the  official  and  authoritative  mouthpiece  for 
the  theological  definitions  and  interpretations  of  the  divine 
law,  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  has  given  over  the 
government  of  the  United  States  into  the  hands  of  the  com- 
bined churches.  A  forcible  American  writer  has  long  ago 
stated  the  principle  thus  :  - 

"To  permit  a  church  —  any  church — .  .  .  to  dictate,  beforehand, 
what  laws  should  or  should  not  be  passed,  would  be  to  deprive  the  peo- 
ple of  all  the  authority  they  have  retained  in  their  own  hands,  and  to 
make  such  church  the  governing  power,  instead  of  them."  1S 

This  is  precisely  what  has  been  done  before  the  eyes  of 
the  people  of  the  tTnited  States  in  this  Sunday  legislation 
of  the  Fifty-second  Congress.  The  combined  "evangelical  " 

13  Hon.  Richard  W.  Thompson,  '-The  Papacy  and  the  Civil  Power,"  p.  45. 
60 


816  THE    CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

churches,  joined  with  the  Catholic  Church,  as  a  united  body 
on  this  question,  did  dictate  under  threats  that  this  law 
should  be  passed.  Congress  did  permit  it,  and  did  yield  to 
the  dictation,  and  in  so  doing,  it  did  deprive  the  people  of 
the  governmental  authority  which  they  had  retained  in  their 
own  hands  by  the  Declaration  and  the  Constitution,  and  did 
make  the  churches  the  governing  power  in  the  government 
instead  of  the  people.  "  Government  of  the  people,  by  the 
people,  and  for  the  people,"  is  gone,  and  there  has  been 
established,  in  its  stead,  the  subjection  of  tJie  people  by  the 
churches  and  for  the  churches. 

And  under  the  mistaken  notion  that  he  was  pledged  to 
maintain  the  government  of  the  United  States,  rather  than 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  President  Benjamin 
Harrison  approved  this  unconstitutional  procedure  on  the 
part  of  Congress.14 

Thus  in  the  year- A.  D.  1892,  the  government  of  the 
United  States,  by  specific  official  acts  of  the  three  depart- 
ments—  the  Judiciary,  the  Legislative,  and  the  Executive  — 
of  which  that  government  is  composed,  was  turned  from  the 
"  New  Order  of  Things  "  to  which  it  was  committed  by  our 
Revolutionary  Fathers,  and  to  which  it  stands  pledged  by  the 


14  This  is  a  fact.  In  a  personal  interview  with  the  author  of  this  book,  the 
reason  (?)  and  the  only  reason  which  he  gave.,  for  approving  this  legislation,  was 
that  it  was  "  part  of  the  general  appropriation  bill  for  the  running  expenses  of 
the  government;  that  to  disapprove,  this  he  would  have  to  disapprove  the  whole 
bill ;  and  if  that  were  done,  all  the  machinery  of  the  government  would  have  to 
stop,  and  the  whole  government  itself  be  brought  to  a  standstill."  This,  too, 
while  admitting  that  if  this  Sunday  legislation  had  come  before  him  separated 
from  other  legislation,  so  that  it  might  be  considered  upon  its  merits  alone,  the 
result  might  be  different.  This  was  nothing  else  than  to  argue  that  he  was  re- 
sponsible for  the  maintenance  of  the  government.  But  this  was  altogether  a 
mistake.  The  maintenance  of  the  government  devolves  altogether  upon  Con- 
gress. And  if  the  president  were  to  veto  a  general  appropriation  bill  because  of 
an  unconstitutional  piece  of  legislation  which  had  been  tacked  to  it;  and  If  the 
whole  government  should  in  consequence  be  brought  Indeed  to  a  standstill,  he 
would  be  no  more  responsible  for  it  than  would  any  private  citizen.  President 
Harrison's  assumption,  therefore,  was  altogether  a  mistaken  one,  and  this  plea 
wholly  irrelevant. 


"  THE  VOICE  OF  RELIGION."  817 

Great  Seal  of  the  government  itself,  and  was  thrown  into 
the  evil  tide  of  the  old  order  of  things.  And  thus  this  en- 
lightened nation,  the  example  and  glory  of  the  world,  was 
caused  to  assume  the  place  and  the  prerogatives  of  the  gov- 
ernments of  the  Middle  Ages  in  embodying  in  the  law  the 
dogmas  and  definitions  of  the  theologians,  and  executing 
the  arbitrary  and  despotic  will  of  the  church. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  Legislative  branch,  the  law-making 
power,  of  the  government  not  only  acted  a  most  responsible 
part  in -this  evil-laden  thing,  but  openly  confessed  and  pub- 
licly announced  that  it  did  so,  and  that  it  did  not  "dare"  to 
do  otherwise.  This,  too,  the  church  power  was  quick  to  see 
and  prompt  to  boast  of.  As  soon  as  the  Senate  had  passed 
the  measure,  even  before  the  House  had  agreed  to  it, 
"Rev."  J.  D.  Sands,  of  the  Seventh  United  Presbyterian 
Church,  Pittsburg,  Penn.,  seizes  the  occasion  to  declaim 
from  his  pulpit  in  a  sermon  preached  July  17,  1892,  as 
follows  :  — 

"That  the  church  has  weight  with  great  political  or  governing 
bodies  has  been  demonstrated  most  effectually  in  the  late  World's  Fail- 
matter,  when  the  United  States  Senate,  the  highest  body  in  the  country, 
listened  to  the  voice  of  religion,  and  passed  the  World's  Fair  $5,000,(XK) 
appropriation  bill  with  the  church  instituted  proviso  that  the  gates  of  the 
great  Exposition  should  not  be  opened  upon  Sunday.  That  grand,  good 
fact  suggests  to  the  Christian's  mind  that  if  this  may  be  done,  so  may 
other  equally  needful  measures.  The  church  is  gaining  power  con- 
tinually, and  its  voice  will  be  Jieard  in  the  future  much  oftener  than  in  the 
past." 

And  the  Christian  Statesmen,  October  1,  1892,  cele- 
brating the  twenty-fifth  anniversary  of  its  founding  for  this 
very  purpose,  joyfully  exclaimed  :  — 

"The  forty  millions  in  the  Christian  homes  of  the  land,  the  ruling 
majority  when  they  assert  themselves,  have  won  at  least  one  great  moral 
victory  in  each  of  the  recent  sessions  of  Congress.  .  .  .  The  Sabbath  - 
closing  victory  with  which  the  quarter  century  closes,  shows  the  way  to 
others  that  will  make  the  nineteenth  century  go  out  in  glory  eight  years 
hence.  For  the  great  Christian  majority  lias  learned,  by  response  to  its 
great  petition,  and  its  host  of  letters  with  reference  to  the  World's  Fair, 


818          THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

that  it  can  have  of  national  and  State  governments  whatever  legislation 
against  immorality  it  will  ask  unitedly  and  earnestly." 

It  was  not  long  before  they  had  an  opportunity  to 
"assert  themselves"  again.  For  no  sooner  had  this  act  of 
religious  legislation  been  done  than  a  movement  was  set  on 
foot  to  have  it  undone.  Men  who  had  all  along  declared 
that  no  such  thing  would  ever  be  done  ' '  in  this  enlightened 
land,"  and  especially  under  a  Constitution  prohibiting  it, 
were  compelled  to  admit  that  just  such  a  thing  had  been 
done  "in  this  enlightened  land,"  and  in  spite  of  a  Constitu- 
tion that  prohibited  it.  They  who  before  had  refused  to  take 
any  part  in  opposing  the  movement  because  there  was  "no 
danger  of  such  a  thing  ever  being  done,"  were  ready  to  op- 
pose it  with  all  their  might,  after  it  had  been  done. 

The  Seventh-day  Adventists  had  been  uncompromisingly 
opposed  to  this  movement  in  all  its  phases  and  in  all  its  pur- 
poses from  its  very  beginning.  Accordingly,  as  soon  as  the 
first  measure  for  religious  legislation  was  introduced  in 
Congtess,  by  Senator  Blair  in  1888,  they  took  steps  to  coun- 
teract it  as  far  as  possible.  Accordingly,  they  circulated  a 
petition  which  was  in  effect,  and  was  intended  to  be,  a 
remonstrance  against  anything  of  Jthe  kind  forever.  That 
petition  runs  as  follows  :  — 

"  To  the  Honorable,  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  [Duplicate  to  the  House 
of  Representatives]  :  — 

"We,  the  undersigned,  adult  residents  of  the  United  States,  twenty- 
one  years  of  age  or  more,  hereby  respectfully,  but  earnesly  petition  your 
Honorable  Body  not  to  pass  any  bill  in  regard  to  the  observance  of  the 
Sabbath,  or  the  Lord's  day,  or  any  other  religious  or  ecclesiastical  institu- 
tion or  rite  ;  nor  to  favor  in  any  way  the  adoption  of  any  resolution  for 
the  amendment  of  the  national  Constitution,  that  would  in  any  way  tend, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  to  give  preference  to  the  principles  of  any 
religion  or  of  any  religious  body  above  another,  or  that  will  in  any  way 
sanction  legislation  upon  the  subject  of  religion  ;  but  that  the  total 
separation  between  religion  and  the  State,  assured  by  the  national  Con- 
stitution as  it  now  is,  may  forever  remain  as  our  fathers  established  it." 


THOSE  WHO  PROTESTED.  819 

To  this  petition,  or  remonstrance,  they  obtained  more 
than  three  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  bona-fide  individual 
signatures.  By  these  and  hearings  before  congressional 
committees  the  Blair  legislation  was  delayed  till  it  died,  and 
the  Breckinridge  bill  was  defeated. 

When  the  demand  was  made  that  Congress  should  close 
the  World's  Columbian  Exposition  on  Sunday,  this  too  was 
opposed  with  the  former  protest,  and  with  the  following 
one  direct :  — 

"We,  the  undersigned,  citizens  of  the  United  States,  hereby  respect- 
fully, but  decidedly,  protest  against  the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
committing  the  United  States  government  to  a  union  of  religion  and  the 
State,  in  the  passage  of  any  bill  or  resolution  to  close  the  World's  Colum- 
bian Exposition  on  Sunday,  or  in  any  other  way  committing  the  govern- 
ment to  a  course  of  religious  legislation." 

While  these  petitions  were  being  circulated,  many  peo- 
ple were  found  who  would  not  allow  that  the  cause  was  of 
sufficient  importance  to  justify  them  in  taking  the  time  even 
to  write  their  names  to  a  protest,  even  though  they  were  in 
full  harmony  with  the  protest  in  itself.  These  men  said  : 
"I  am  in  favor  of  what  that  says,  as  much  as  you  are; 
but  it  is  all  nonsense  to  be  circulating  such  a  thing  as  that 
for  signatures  to  be  sent  to  Congress.  Although  I  agree 
with  it  all,  I  would  not  take  the  time  to  sign  my  name  to  it. 
There  is  not  the  least  danger  that  any  such  thing  as  that 
protests  against,  will  ever  be  done.  You  would  better  go 
home  and  spend  your  time  at  more  profitable  business." 
And  just  because  so  many  people  were  so  sure  that  it  never 
would  be  done,  it  was  done.  One  member  of  Congress  in 
response  to  one  of  these  petitions  that  had  been  sent  to  him 
to  be  presented,  said  that  if  any  such  measure  as  this  op- 
posed were  ever  proposed  in  Congress,  he  did  not  "believe 
that  there  could  be  found  a  dozen  members  in  the  House 
who  would  favor  it."  And  just  three  weeks  from  the  day 
that  he  wrote  this  letter,  the  question  came  to  a  vote  in  the 


820  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

House  of   Representatives,  and   this   gentleman   saw   more 
than  a  dozen   dozen  men  vote  for  it. 

Then  the  unbelieving  ones  awoke  to  the  fact  that  they 
had  mistaken  the  importance  of  the  issue,  and  immediately 
set  out  to  retrieve  this  mistake  by  making  another, — they 
Demanded  that  the  Exposition  should  be  opened  on  Sunday 
by  act  of  Congress.  This  was  only  to  ask  for  further  relig- 
ious legislation  ;  because  Congress  had  no  more  right  to  say 
that  the  Exposition  should  be  opened  on  Sunday  than  it  had 
to  say  that  it  should  be  closed  on  that  day. 

Those  who  had  been  protesting  all  the  time  against  letting 
Congress  have  anything  to  do  with  the  question  in  any  way 
whatever,  insisted  that  now  Congress  should  simply  undo 
what  it  had  done,  that  it  should  repeal  its  Sunday  legisla- 
tion, because  of  its  unconstitutionality ,  thus  putting  the  gov- 
ernment back  in  harmony  with  the  Constitution  on  its  own 
part,  and  leaving  the  matter  of  Sunday  observance,  with  all 
other  religious  matters,  to  the  States  or  to  the  people  where 
the  Constitution  itself  placed  it. 

Any  question  of  the  full  propriety  of  the  legislation, 
however,  gave  to  the  church  managers  their  coveted  oppor- 
tunity further  to  "assert  themselves."  And  they  did  it  to 
the  utmost  of  their  power,  and  in  the  same  way  as  at  the 
first — by  threats  of  the  "boycott"  and  whatever  else  they 
could  bring  to  bear.  And  as  in  the  first  instance,  so  in 
this,  Congress  yielded  to  the  requirements  of  the  combined 
churches,  instead  of  to  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution. 
This,  too,  for  religious  reasons,  which  alone  were  urged,  and 
which  were  supported  by  frequent  reference  to  the  Su- 
preme Court  decision  that  "  this  is  a  Christian  nation." 

A  hearing  was  held  at  Washington  City,  January  10-13, 
1893,  before  the  House  Committee  on  Columbian  Exposition, 
at  which  were  present  leading  representatives  of  the  whole 
National  Reform- American  Sabbath  Union  combination,  the 
Evangelical  Alliance,  and  the  Young  People's  Society  of 
Christian  Endeavor.  There  were  present  also  representa- 


THE  CONSTITUTION  EXCLUDED.  821 

lives  of  those  who  wanted  the  Exposition  opened  by  act  of 
Congress ;  and  of  those  who  were  and  always  had  been  un- 
compromisingly opposed  to  letting  Congress  have  anything  to 
do  with  the  question  one  way  or  the  other.  About  sixty 
speeches  in  all  were  made.  All  argument,  however,  based 
on  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  original  legislation  was 
positively  excluded,15  while  arguments  based  upon  religion 
and  religion  only,  in  consideration  of  "heavenly  things'"  and 
to  the  exclusion  of  "earthly  things,"  were  heard  for  hours. 
The  president  of  the  American  Sabbath  Union  opened 
the  discussion  on  that  side  with  words  as  follows  :  — 

"I  approach  this  subject  with  great  reverence.  When  we  come  to 
deal  with  heavenly  things,  we  should  put  aside  earthly  things,  and  should  do 
very  much  as  the  Jews  used  to  do  in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  ;  before 
they  made  their  offerings,  before  they  entered  upon  the  service,  they  pre- 
pared themselves  by  ablution  and  by  prayer  for  the  proper  discharge  of 
their  duties.  Now  when  we  come  to  consider  the  Sabbath,  that  it  rests 
upon  the  law  of  God,  that  it  is  a  revelation  to  mankind  which  no  one 
would  have  thought  of,  that  we  owe  it  entirely  to  our  Father  which  is  in 
heaven,  we  ought  therefore  to  come  with  the  same  reverential  spirit  to 
its  consideration  ourselves.  .  .  .  We  represent  the  Christian  sentiment 
of  the  United  States  of  America.  .  .  . 

"We  hope  that  Congress  will  maintain  its  dignity.  We  have  re- 
solved not  to  say  one  single  word  as  to  the  constitutionality  or  unconsti- 
tutionality of  this  law  before  this  committee  ;  for  to  claim  that  it  is 
unconstitutional  here  would  be  a  reflection  upon  the  committee,  upon 
both  Houses  of  Congress,  and  upon  the  president  of  the  United  States 
who  approved  this  law.  And  you  yourself  very  wisely  took  that  last 
consideration  entirely  out  from  before  the  committee,  when  you  stated 
this  was  not  the  place  to  argue  that  question.  Therefore  we  dismiss  it 
without  saying  a  single  word.  .  .  . 

"When  our  blessed  Lord  was  incarnate  in  Palestine,  he  approved 
and  magnified  that  law,  saying,  '  I  come  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfill. 
And  then  he  gives  another  point  on  the  Sabbath,  which  was,  that  the 
'Sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath  ;'  and  that 
'the  Son  of  man,'  our  Lord,  'is  Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath.'  In  other 
words,  it  is  a  part  of  his  patrimony,  given  to  him  by  our  Father  who  is 
in  heaven,  and  every  one  who  attempts  to  cut  it  off  in  any  way,  robs  Jesus 
himself.  .  .  . 

15  See  "  Captivity  of  the  Republic,"  p.  34. 


822          THE   CON8PIRA  CY  S  UCCEEDS.  —  CONCL  UD  ED. 

"And  on  the  other  hand,  when  we  talk  of  elevating  the  people  and 
lifting  them  up  higher,  can  we  get  any  higher  principle,  or  any  higher 
method  of  doing  this,  than  that  which  was  adopted  by  our  blessed  Lord 
himself  ?  —  Not  at  all.  And  is  it  not  rather  to  be  thought  that  these  people 
icho  are  especially  consecrated  to  the  service  of  God,  are  better  able,  through 
their  consecration,  and  through  their  education,  to  inculcate  what  will  best 
elevate  the  people,  than  those  who  are  ignorant  of  that  sort  of  connection, 
and  approach  the  subject  from  a  lower  and  entirely  different  standpoint? 

"Now  this  day  we  are  to  present  to  you  in  brief  speeches,  the  senti- 
ments of  the  Christian  Church  and  common  people  of  the  United  States 
in  the  various  branches  of  that  church,  and  without  any  further  intro- 
duction, I  will  ask  that  the  roll  should  now  be  taken  up."  16 

This  was  followed  by  many  others  of  the  same  tenor,  in 
which  the  committee  and  Congress  were  exhorted  as  in  the 
presence  of  death  and  in  view  of  the  judgment  to  "  stand  by 
the  side,  and  to  the  "preservation,  of  God's  holy  day  ; "  and 
were  warned  that  "if  we  touch  that  fourth  commandment, 
God  will  bring  a  curse  upon  us  as  a  nation."17 

The  result  of  this  hearing,  and  the  situation  as  it  stood 
at  the  close  of  the  hearing,  was  reported  from  Washington 
to  the  Chicago  Herald  the  day  that  the  hearing  was  ended 
—  January  13.  And  everybody  who  was  at  the  Capitol  at 
that  time  can  certify  to  the  absolute  correctness  of  the  re- 
port. Here  is  the  material  portion  of  it :  — 

"  The  churches  and  the  ministers  are  at  work  again  quite  as  ear- 
nestly as  they  were  a  year  ago,  and  with  equal  effectiveness.  While 
there  was  no  doubt  a  month  ago  that  if  a  vote  could  have  been  taken 
upon  the  question  of  Sunday  opening  at  once,  a  comfortable  majority 
would  have  been  found  in  both  houses  of  Congress  for  opening,  it  is 
not  now  likely  that  the  Durborow  resolution  can  be  carried  through 
either  body.  .  .  . 

"  The  odds  are  decidedly  against  the  resolution  ever  getting  into  the 
House,  and  even  if  it  shall  be  reported,  no  one  can  find  a  majority  in  its 
favor.  The  trouble  is  that  a  large  number  of  members  who  believe  in 
Sunday  opening  on  principle  and  as  a  matter  of  right,  are  too  timid  to 
vote  their  convictions  in  the  face  of  the  organized  opposition  from  the  churches 
and  ministers.  These  statesmen  argue  that  the  men  who  want  the  Fair 
open  on  Sunday  are  reasonable  men,  who  will  not  permit  their  judg- 
ment or  their  votes  to  be  affected  by  failure  to  get  what  they  want. 

J6  "  Captivity  of  the  Kepublic,"  pp.  41,  42.  " Id.,  pp.  42-47, 


HOW  THEY  "ASSERTED    THEMSELVES."  823 

While,  on  the  other  hand,  the  church  people  icho  are  for  Sunday  dosing 
will,  if  their  wishes  are  thwarted,  lose  their  tempers,  and  at  the  next  election, 
make  trouble  for  those  who  wte  against  them. 

"This  sort  of  cowardice  or  caution,  combined  with  the  fact  that  the 
ministers  who  are  making  Sunday  closing  a  sort  of  stock-in-trade  have  no 
hesitancy  about  bulldozing  their  congressional  representatives  or  any  one  else 
they  can  get  hold  of,  offers  an  explanation  of  the  changed  condition  of 
affairs  with  reference  to  this  question." 

Lest  anybody  should  be  inclined  to  pass  this  by  as  a 
mere  newspaper  report,  and  perhaps  prejudiced  at  that,  we 
shall  present  the  deliberate  judgment  of  two  members  of 
the  House.  Representative  Reilly,  of  Pennsylvania,  made 
a  statement  which  was  printed  in  the  same  issue  of  the  Her- 
ald as  was  the  foregoing,  as  follows  :  — 

"The  present  agitation,  if  continued,  can  only  result  in  injury  to  the 
Fair.  Attempts  to  have  the  law  repealed  only  result  in  stirring  up  ani- 
mosity toward  the  Fair,  and  creating  antagonism  on  the  part  of  the 
church  people.  They  can  do  the  Fair  much  harm  if  they  decide  to  carry 
out  the  threats  they  have  already  made,  and  I  think  the  friends  of  the  Ex- 
position who  favor  Sunday  opening  would  act  wisely  in  ceasing  their 
efforts." 

And  Representative  George  W.  Houk  wrote  a  letter  on 
on  this  subject  to  President  Higinbotham  of  the  Exposition, 
which  was  printed  in  the  Chicago  Tribune,  February  5,  1893. 
After  stating  his  "deliberate  conviction  that  Congress  was 
and  is  without  any  constitutional  power  or  authority  what- 
ever to  impose  such  a  condition  upon  the  grant  of  the  appro- 
priation," he  states  the  case  thus  :  — 

"  At  this  point  I  now  beg  to  call  your  attention  to  certain  existing 
facts.  A  most  extensive  religious  agitation  has  been  made  to  prevail  all 
over  the  country,  upon  this  question.  Concerted  action  has  been  taken 
by  the  clergy  and  upon  the  question  as  presented  by  them  to  their 
congregations,  as  to  whether  they  were  in  favor  of  '  the  desecration  of 
the  Sabbath.'  An  entire  unanimity  of  sentiment  has  been  obtained,  of 
course,  among  the  Protestant  Christian  churches  at  least,  and  other 
large  organizations  of  Christian  workers,  against  the  repeal  of  the  con- 
dition requiring  the  closing  of  the  Exposition  Sundays. 

"From  the  nature,  extent,  and  character  of  the  opposition,  based 
as  I  think  it  is,  upon  an  erroneous,  though  conscientious  sentiment, 
rather  than  upon  a  deliberate  and  rational  judgment,  it  occurs  to  me 


824          THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.— CONCLUDED. 

that  in  case  it  were  possible  to  have  the  existing  law  repealed,  it  might 
after  all  ultimately  result  in  serious  detriment  to  the  final  success  of  the 
Exposition. 

"  It  is  of  the  first  importance,  in  my  judgment,  to  the  final  success  of 
the  Exposition  that  there  should  be  a  harmonious  co-operation  on  the 
part  of  all  the  people  of  the  United  States  in  its  support.  If  the  present 
law  requiring  the  gates  to  be  closed  Sundays  to  the  public,  should  be  re- 
pealed by  a  vote  of  a  majority  in  both  the  House  and  Senate,  which  does 
not  seem  to  me  at  all  probable,  and  the  act  should  receive  the  sanction 
of  the  president,  which  seems  to  be  equally  improbable,  it  is  certain  that 
the  religious  element  of  the  country,  through  all  its  organizations, 
would  be  deeply  offended,  and  would  array  itself  in  antagonism  to 
the  Fair. 

"It  is  not  a  question  whether  such  a  course  would  be  reasonable  or 
not ;  and,  while  such  action  might  be  regarded  as  an  exhibition  of  re- 
ligious fanaticism,  most  remarkable  under  the  circumstances,  it  is  never- 
theless true  that  a  large  number  of  good,  conscientious,  Christian  people 
throughout  the  country,  in  their  excited  state  of  feeling  upon  this  ques- 
tion, would  be  likely  to  pursue  that  course. 

"I  am  in  a  position  to  have  reliable  information  in  regard  to  this 
matter,  and  although  I  firmly  believe  that  the  refusal  to  permit  the  Ex- 
position to  be  opened  to  the  public  Sundays  under  the  regulations  I 
have  suggested,  will  be  a  most  deplorable  mistake,  I  am  also  fully  pur- 
suaded  that  the  repeal  of  the  existing  law  closing  its  gates  would  array 
the  whole  religious  element  of  the  United  States  (Protestant  at  least) 
against  it.  ... 

"The  question  now  to  be  decided  by  the  management  is,  whether  it 
is  advisable  further  to  urge  a  doubtful  contest,  upon  a  matter  that  is  aga 
gravating  an  already  extensive  and  bitter  hostility  against  Chicago  and 
the  Exposition,  which  even  if  ultimately  successful,  would  be  as  likely  to 
be  fraught  with  disaster  as  benefit  to  the  enterprise." 

Now  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  is  the  only 
thing  in  existence  that  gives  to  any  member  of  Congress, 
either  senator  or  representative,  any  power  or  authority. 
He  owes  his  very  existence  as  a  member  of  that  body,  to  the 
Constitution.  The  Constitution  defines  his  powers  and  sets 
the  limitations  of  the  exercise  thereof.  This  is  his  only  legiti- 
mate guide.  To  take  any  other  thing  as  his  guide  in  legisla- 
tion, is  to  repudiate  the  Constitution  and  to  put  that  other 


THE   UNDENIABLE  RECORD.  825 

thing  in  its  place ;  and,  as  shown  before,  is  to  rob  the  people 
of  all  the  governmental  authority  which  by  the  very  idea  of  a 
written  constitution,  they  have  retained  in  their  own  hands,  and 
is  to  make  this  other  thing  the  governing  power,  instead  of  the 
people.  It  makes  the  caprice  and  arbitrary  will  of  a  few  the 
only  guide  in  legislation  and  governmental  affairs,  instead 
of  the  deliberate  judgment  of  the  majority  as  expressed  in 
the  Constitution. 

The  undeniable  record  in  this  case  shows  that  — 

1.  The  leaders  of  the  combined  churches  of  the  United 
States  asked  Congress  to  do  what  they  knew,  and  had  de- 
clared for  years,  to  be  an  unconstitutional  thing. 

2.  When  Congress  did  not  respond  readily  enough,  they 
turned  their  petitions  into  demands  under  threats. 

3.  Congressmen  did  yield  to  these  threatening  demands, 
openly  announced  that  they  did  so,  and  that  they  did  not 
dare  to  do  otherwise. 

4.  When   an  attempt  was  made  to  have  Congress  undo 
this  legislation  and  take  its  stand  once  more  on  the  Constitu- 
tion only,  the  chairman  of  a  congressional  committee  deliber- 
ately ruled  out  all  discussion  based  upon  the  Constitution,  and 
admitted,  unquestioned,  discussion  based  only  upon  religion 
and  the  consideration  of  "  heavenly  things." 

5.  To   the   threats  and    demonstrations  of   violence    on 
the  part  of  the  church  leaders,  Congress  yielded  the  second 
time,  thus  confirming  its  unconstitutional  course  instead  of 
correcting  it. 

6.  Congress  thus  confirmed  its  repudiation  of  the  Con- 
stitution, its  only  legitimate  guide,  and  its  choosing  as  its 
guide  instead  the  church  power  —  the  very  thing  above  all 
others  that  the  Constitution  and  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  government  were  intended  forever  to  exclude. 

7.  And  in  confirmation  of  the  known  unconstitutionally 
of  this  whole  high-handed  procedure,  the  chief  managers  of 
this  religious  combination  have  since  declared  in  print  that 


826  THE   CONSPIRACY  SUCCEEDS.—  CONCLUDED. 

"  the  Constitution  furnished  no  guarantee  for  such  legis- 
lation. v  18 

How  could  there  possibly  be  a  more  complete  reversal  of 
the  order  of  things  established  and  intended  by  those  who 
made  our  national  government  and  its  Constitution  ?  How 
could  there  possibly  be  a  more  direct  and  complete  revolu- 
tion of  the  principles  of  our  government  than  has  been  ac- 
complished in  this  case,  in  its  inception,  its  intent,  its 
conduct,  and  its  successful  issue  as  it  stands  to-day  through 
the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  the  action  of  Congress, 
and  the  approval  of  the  president  of  the  United  States  ? 

The  Great  Conspiracy  has  succeeded.  It  has  accom- 
plished its  avowed  purpose  "to  change  that  feature  of  our 
fundamental  law"  which  declares  that  "governments  derive 
their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed  ; "  and  in 
its  place  they  have  set  up  that  feature  of  the  papacy  which 
insists  that  governments  derive  their  powers  from  "  the  will 
of  God"  as  expressed  through  the  church.  The  government 
founded  by  our  fathers  according  to  the  divine  principles 
which  Jesus  Christ  announced  for  civil  governments,  has 
been  swept  away  ;  and  in  its  place  there  has  been  set  up,  in 
principle,  and  in  procedure  so  far,  THE  LIVING  IMAGE  OF  THE 
PAPACY. 


is  u  The  National  Reform  Movement,"  a  leaflet  distributed  at  the  annual 
convention  of  the  National  Reform  Association,  held  in  Allegheny,  Pa.,  Novem- 
ber, 1893. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 


WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

AS  to  what  shall  be  the  results  of  this  success  of  The  Great 
Conspiracy,  we  might  with  perfect  safety  refer  the  reader 
to  Chapters  XII- XXI  inclusive,  of  this  book,  as  at  the  be- 
ginning of  Chapter  XXVII,  and  leave  the  matter  there,  well 
assured  that  the  course  of  events  will  be  in  substance  as 
there  developed  in  the  history  of  the  like  procedure  before. 
However,  as  there  are  important  developments  already,  it 
may  be  helpful  and  certainly  not  in  vain  to  consider  them. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  it  is  not  merely  to  the  church 
power  in  itself,  but  to  the  principle  of  violence  and  lawless- 
ness that  the  government  of  the  United  States  has  been  sur- 
rendered. And  that  principle  asserted  by  the  professed 
Protestantism,  the  professed  Christianity  indeed,  of  the 
country  —  by  that  which  professes  to  represent,  and  in  name 
does  represent,  all  the  elements  of  righteousness,  peace,  and 
gentleness  !  This  is  what  makes  the  situation  so  much 
worse  than  it  otherwise  would  be. 

The  facts  set  forth  in  the  previous  chapter,  as  well  as  the 
statements  from  representatives  in  Congress  on  the  subject, 
show  that  the  church  people  who  were  engaged  in  this  cam- 
paign for  national  Sunday  legislation,  are  worse  than  the 
people  who  do  not  belong  to  church.  For  "these  states- 
men "  argued  that  the  people  who  were  opposed  to  this  legis- 
lation "are  reasonable  men  who  will  not  permit  their  judg- 
ment or  their  votes  to  be  affected  by  failure  to  get  what  they 
want.  While  on  the  other  hand,  the  church  people  who 

[827] 


828  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

are  for  Sunday  closing  will,  if  their  wishes  are  thwarted, 
lose  their  tempers,  and  at  the  next  election  make  trouble  for 
those  who  vote  against  them."  What  is  this,  then,  but  to 
say,  and  to  say  truly,  that  the  church  people  who  demand 
Sunday  legislation  are  more  unruly  and  more  dangerous  to 
public  interests  than  the  people  who  do  not  belong  to  the 
church  ?  For,  generally  speaking,  the  people  who  are  op- 
posed to  Sunday  legislation  are  not  church  people  ;  and  such 
church  people  as  are  opposed  to  it  are  not  considered  by 
these  others  to  be  "orthodox.""  And  in  consideration  of 
the  mischief,  the  trouble,  and  the  damage  to  the  country, 
that  they  would  do  if  they  should  not  have  their  own  way, 
the  government  itself  must  be  surrendered  to,  and  run  in  the 
interests  of,  this  dangerous  element ! 

Nor  is  it  in  Congress  alone  that  this  principle  is  recog- 
nized. It  has  been  given  a  place  in  the  judicial  procedure  of 
the  United  States  courts.  On  page  749  reference  is  made 
to  the  decision  of  the  United  States  Circuit  Court  for  the 
western  district  of  Tennessee  giving  legal  sanction  to  the 
practice  of  persecution  to  secure  the  recognition  of  Sunday. 
In  that  same  connection,  the  court  said  :  — 

"By  a  sort  of  factitious  advantage,  the  observers  of  Sunday  have 
secured  the  aid  of  the  civil  law,  and  adhere  to  that  advantage  with  great 
tenacity,  in  spite  of  the  clamor  for  religious  freedom  and  the  progress 
that  has  heen  made  in  the  absolute  separation  of  Church  and  State.  .  .  . 
And  the  efforts  to  extirpate  the  advantage  above  mentioned  by  judicial 
decision  in  favor  of  a  civil  right  to  disregard  the  change,  seem  to  me 
quite  useless." 

The  court  was  composed  of  Circuit  Judge  Howell  E. 
Jackson,  now  a  member  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  and  District  Judge  E.  S.  Hammond.  The  opinion 
was  written  by  Judge  Hammond,  and  was  filed  August  1, 
1891.  Then  in  the  Memphis  Appeal- Avalanche  of  August 
30,  there  was  published  a  four-column  article  by  Judge 
Hammond,  dated  August  12,  and  entitled  "The  Sunday 


"PRESERVING    THE  PUBLIC   ORDER."  829 

Habit,"  which  is  little  if  anything  else  than  a  defense  of  the 
decision  that  had  been  rendered  on  this  subject  August  1. 
In  this  article  the  judge  confesses  that  "the  logic  of  this 
[his]  position  may  lead  to  a  union  of  Church  and  State  un- 
doubtedly ;  "  but  that  the  support  of  Sunday  by  the  civil 
power  and  by  persecutions  "  is  a  necessityof  statesmanship  " 
upon  "  the  policy  of  securing  the  public  peace."  The  dan- 
ger to  the  public  peace,  and  the  source  of  it,  if  Sunday  laws 
were  disregarded  by  those  who  have  a  "distaste  for,  or  a 
disbelief  in,  the  custom  ; "  or  if  they  were  attacked  by  a 
proposal  to  abolish  them,  is  set  forth  as  follows  :  — 

"  We  have  lived  so  free  of  it  in  modern  days  that  we  forget  the  force 
of  religious  fanaticism,  and  he  who  supposes  that  its  fury  cannot  be 
again  aroused  may  be  mistaken.  .  .  . 

"Christians  would  become  alarmed,  and  they  might  substitute  for 
the  stars  and  other  symbols  of  civil  freedom  upon  the  banners  of  their 
armed  hosts,  the  symbol  of  the  cross  of  Christ,  and  fight  for  their  re- 
ligion at  the  expense  of  their  civil  government.  They  have  done  this 
in  times  that  are  passed,  and  they  could  do  it  again.  And  he  is  not  a 
wise  statesman  who  overlooks  a  possibility  like  this,  and  endangers  the 
public  peace.  .  .  . 

"  The  civilian,  as  contradistinguished  from  the  churchman,  though 
united  in  tJie  same  person,  may  find  in,  the  principle  of  preserving  the  public 
order  a  satisfactory  warrant  for  yielding  to  religious  prejudice  and 
fanaticism  the  support  of  those  laws,  when  the  demand  for  such  a  sup- 
port may  become  a  force  that  would  disturb  the  public  order.  It  may 
be  a  constantly  diminishing  force,  but  if  it  be  yet  strong  enough  to  create 
disturbance,  statesmanship  takes  account  of  it  as  a  factor  in  the  prob- 
lem.'' 

This  statement  and  those  of  representatives  Reilly  and 
Houk,  cited  in  the  previous  chapter,  are  the  deliberate 
opinions  of  representative  men,  and  officials  in  official  place 
—  men  who  were  in  position  not  only  to  know,  but  in  which 
they  were  obliged  to  consider  the  question  in  all  its  bearings. 
And  when,  having  so  considered  the  question,  they  set  forth 
this  as  their  deliberate  conclusion,  then  nothing  more  is 
needed  to  demonstrate  that  the  church  element  that  is 


830  WUAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

managing  and  supporting  the  Sunday  cause  in  the  United 
States  is  one  of  the  most  dangerous  elements  in  the  United 
States. 

This  thought  was  so  well  presented  before  the  House 
Committee  on  Columbian  Exposition,  January  12,  1893,  by 
Mrs.  Marion  Foster  Washburne,  of  Chicago,  that  her  earnest 
and  weighty  words  are  worthy  of  a  place  in  this  or  any  other 
book.  In  referring  to  the  speeches  and  representations  of  the 
clergy  before  the  same  committee  the  day  before,  she  said:  — 

"Moreover,  they  threatened  —  and  of  all  things,  the  boycott!  The 
very  tactics  they  preach  against  from  their  pulpits.  And  one  man  said 
that  the  'religious  boycott  was  justified  by  the  deep  prejudices  of 
the  people.' 

"I  have  a  profound  respect  and  reverence,  as  all  fair-minded  people 
must  have,  for  the  man  who  believes  in  his  religion  and  stands  upon  it 
against  the  world  ;  but  I  have  precious  little  respect  for  the  clergyman, 
who,  when  he  wants  to  win  a  worldly  advantage,  uses  a  worldly  argu- 
ment, making  the  admission  that  the  heavenly  one  is  insufficient  for 
practical  purposes.  The  man  who  claims  to  have  faith  in  prayer,  and 
yet  descends  to  the  boycott  ! 

"...  I  know  that  we  cannot  possibly  make  as  good  a  showing  as 
some  church  societies,  and  the  reason  is  that  we  are  not  organized  as 
they  are.  The  great  mass  of  liberal  and  thoughtful  people  all  over  the 
country  are  not  so  organized  that  they  can  act  as  one,  before  such  a  com- 
mittee, but  their  numbers  may  be  —  nay,  are  —  even  greater  than  those 
contained  in  the  societies  here  represented.  They  are  simply  quiet  and 
tolerant  private  citizens,  who,  for  the  most  part,  are  rather  amused  that 
any  one  should  be  intolerant.  But  while  this  organization  of  the  evan- 
gelical churches  gives  them  an  advantage  in  being  able  to  present 
petitions  and  speakers,  it  is,  gentlemen,  a  danger  !  Our  forefathers  fore- 
saw the  danger  of  an  organized  minority  coercing  an  unorganized 
majority,  and  forbade  this  country  a  standing  army  ;  there  is  as  much 
danger,  or,  as  the  history  of  religious  persecution  shows,  more  danger,  in 
the  interference  of  an  organized  body  of  churchmen  in  tlie  affairs  of  the 
State,  than  in  a  standing  army."  x 

That  the  government  and  people  of  the  United  States 
should  be  deliberately  surrendered  into  the  power  of  this 
most  dangerous  and  destructive  element,  is  bad  enough. 

1  "Captivity  of  the  Republic,"  pp.  50,  51. 


IT  IS  NOT  CHRISTIANITY.  831 

That  this  pandering  to  this  most  dangerous  and  destruc- 
tive element,  and  this  deliberate  surrender  of  the  govern- 
ment and  the  nation  to  it,  should  be  advertised  and  exalted 
as  "wise  statesmanship"  by  those  who  have  done  it,  is  far 
worse. 

It  is  not  statesmanship  of  any  kind,  either  wise  or  other- 
wise. It  is  shameful  cowardice.  It  is  a  base  betrayal  of 
the  supreme  public  trust  —  the  rights  of  all  the  people. 

But  that  this  most  dangerous  and  destructive  element 
should  be  advertised  and  exalted  and  respected  as  Chris- 
tianity, by  those  who  have  surrendered  to  it,  as  well  as  by 
those  who  manifest  it  and  impose  it  on  the  government,  is 
simply  abominable.  Eead  Luke  23  :  23,  24  ;  Matt.  27  :  24. 

It  is  not  Christianity  in  any  sense.     It  is  deviltry. 

Yet  in  the  face  of  the  indubitable  evidence  that  the  ele- 
ment that  manages  the  Sunday  cause  is  of  such  dangerous 
proclivities  that  the  government  of  the  United  States  must 
be  surrendered  to  it  in  order  "to  preserve  the  public  peace," 
these  same  ones  evidently  take  great  pride  in  advertising 
and  exalting  themselves  as  "the  best  people  of  the  land," 
and  the  "  law-abiding  people  of  the  country  !  " 

The  truth  is,  however,  that  this  claim,  like  the  claim  of 
their  Sunday  Sabbath,  is  absolutely  fraudulent.  The  undeni- 
able fact  is  that  these  very  ones  are  of  the  least  law-abiding 
people  in  the  United  States.  They  have  demonstrated  that 
they  have  no  respect  for  any  law  but  such  as  their  own 
arbitrary  will  approves.  For  without  the  slightest  hesi- 
tation, yea,  rather,  with  open  persistence,  they  have  know- 
ingly disregarded  and  overridden  the  supreme  law  —  the 
Constitution  —  of  the  United  States. 

Their  action  is  as  much  worse  than  that  of  the  average 
law-breaker,  and  their  offense  as  much  greater,  as  the  supreme 
law  of  the  land  is  greater  and  more  important  than  local 
statutes.  The  average  law-breaker  damages  the  individual / 
these  supreme  law-breakers  damage  the  whole  nation.  The 
average  law-breaker  invades  the  rights  of  the  individual; 

61 


832  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

these  supreme  law-breakers  have  invaded  and  even  swept 
away  the  rights  of  all  the  people.  The  average  law.-breaker 
disregards  social  order  only  in  the  locality  where  he  is ; 
while  these  supreme  law-breakers  strike  at  the  very  exist- 
ence of  social  order  by  breaking  down  the  chief  govern- 
mental safeguard.  For  the  average  law-breaker,  there  is 
always  a  ready  remedy  in  the  regular  forms  of  governmental 
order  ;  but  for  these  supreme  law-breakers,  these  who  have 
overridden  the  Constitution,  and  so  have  broken  down  the 
established  safeguards  of  governmental  order  itself,  where 
is  the  remedy  ? 

These  facts  demonstrate  that  instead  of  their  being  truly 
the  law-abiding  portion  of  the  people,  these  men  are  among 
the  chiefest  law-breakers  in  the  land  —  the  most  lawless  of 
all  the  nation.  Nor  is  this  at  all  to  be  wondered  at.  For 
in  order  to  accomplish  this  their  bad  purpose,  they  "gladly 
joined  hands"  and  hearts  with  the  papacy  —  that  power 
which  the  Lord  designates  as  the  "lawless  one"  and  as  the 
very  "mystery  of  lawlessness"  itself.  2  Thess.  ii,  3,  7 
(R.  V.).  ' 

Nor  is  it  to  be  considered  at  all  strange  that  they  should 
show  themselves  so  lawless  as  to- disregard  and  override  the 
supreme  law  of  the  nation,  and  join  themselves  to  the  very 
"mystery  of  lawlessness"  to  accomplish  this  lawless  pur- 
pose. For,  for  all  these  years  they  have  openly,  both  in 
actions  and  words,  disregarded  and  overridden  the  supreme 
law  of  the  universe, —  the  law  of  God  which  he  proclaimed 
with  a  voice  that  shook  the  earth,  and  wrote  with  his  own 
finger  of  fire  on  the  tables  of  stone, — and  they  have  fol- 
lowed the  preaching,  the  precedent,  and  the  authority  of  the 
mystery  of  lawlessness  in  the  doing  of  it. 

The  Sabbath  of  the  Lord,  the  seventh  day,  which  he  him- 
self has  named  and  appointed,  which  he  declared  with  his 
own  voice  from  heaven,  which  is  his  own,  upon  which  he 
placed  his  blessing,  which  he  made  holy,  and  which  he 
sanctified  —  this,  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord,  is  the  sign  of 


SUPREME  LAWLESSNESS.  833 

what  Jesus  Christ  is  to  those  who  believe  in  him.  The  ob- 
servance of  it  by  faith  —  the  true  observance  of  it  —  brings 
into  the  life  of  the  believer  in  Jesus,  as  nothing  else  can, 
the  living  presence  and  power  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  true, 
and  every  man  may  know  it  by  faith  in  Jesus. 

All  these  years  they  and  the  people  have  been  told  in 
the  words  of  God  that  "the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of 
the  Lord."  But  instead  of  believing  it,  or  allowing  the  peo- 
ple to  believe  it,  they  have  disregarded  it  and  declared  that 
it  is  not  so.  They  have  taught  the  people  that  it  is  not  so. 
They  have  put  no  difference  between  the  holy  and  the  pro- 
fane (Ezek.  xxiii,  36),  by  telling  the  people  that  it  makes  no 
difference  what  day  they  keep.  Thus  they  disregard  the  law 
of  the  living  God,  and  teach  the  people  to  disregard  it. 
Then  after  teaching  the  people  to  disregard  the  plain  word 
of  the  law  of  God  as  to  the  observance  of  the  day  which  he 
has  commanded,  and  telling  all  that  there  is  no  command  of 
God  for  the  observance  of  Sunday,  they  join  heart  and  hand 
with  the  Mystery  of  Lawlessness  to  force  upon  all  the  Sunday 
which  the  papacy  lias  established  instead  of  the  Sabbath  of 
the  Lord.  They  set  the  sign  of  the  Mystery  of  Lawlessness 
above  the  sign  of  the  living  God,  and  would  compel  all  to 
receive  it. 

Having  thus  forsaken  the  Lord,  and  all  true  allegiance  to 
his  law,  and  gone  over  bodily  and  heartily  and  "  gladly ''  to 
the  Mystery  of  Lawlessness  —  having  g'one  to  such  lengths  as 
this  in  despising  the  law  of  the  living  God,  it  is  not  at  all  to 
be  wondered  at  that  they  would  despise  the  supreme  law  of 
the  government  of  the  United  States,  nor  that  they  should 
require  Congress,  in  violation  of  its  solemn  oath,  to  join  in 
their  high-handed  enterprise,  and  establish  their  lawless  pur- 
pose by  the  surrender  of  the  power  of  the  national  govern- 
ment into  their  hands  to  be  used  at  their  lawless  will,  and 
to  enforce  upon  all  their  lawless  decrees. 

In  view  of  such  an  example  as  this,  should  it  be  thought 
surprising  that  lawlessness  should  be  manifested  by  others 


834  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

throughout  the  whole  country  as  never  before,  and  that  vio- 
lence should  cover  the  land  from  ocean  to  ocean  ?  In  view 
of  such  an  example  as  this  set  by  "  the  best  people  "  of  the 
land,  should  it  be  thought  strange  that  the  example  should 
be  followed  by  the  "Industrials,"  "  Common wealers," 
"Coxeyites,"  or  the  worst  people  of  the  land?  If  it  is 
proper  for  the  preachers  and  churches  of  the  country  to 
threaten  Congress  till  their  confessedly  unconstitutional  de- 
mands are  complied  with,  why  is  it  not  equally  proper  for 
the  "  Commonwealers,"  and  everybody  else,  also  to  threaten 
Congress  till  their  demands  are  complied  with  ?  If  Con- 
gress can  guarantee  to  the  people  religion,  even  on  Sunday, 
why  shall  it  not  also  guarantee  to  the  people  money  on 
every  day  of  the  week  ?  When  the  principle  of  the  petition 
by  threat,  and  legislation  by  clamor,  and  the  surrender  of 
governmental  prerogative  to  preserve  the  public  peace,  has 
been  once  recognized  in  favor  of  one  class,  then  why  shall 
not  the  principle  be  applied  in  behalf  of  any  and  every  other 
class,  on  demand?  Why  should  Coxey,  Browne,  Kelly, 
Frye,  and  company  be  denounced,  prosecuted,  fined,  and 
imprisoned,  while  simply  following  the  example  of  Crafts, 
Cook,  Shepard,  George,  and  company,  in  which  these  latter 
were  listened  to  and  honored  by  the  preference  of  Congress. 
There  is  another  result,  or  rather,  phase  of  the  same  re- 
sult, which  has  appeared  promptly  upon  this  action  of  the 
professed  Protestantism  of  the  United  States  ;  that  is,  the 
bold  and  rapid  strides  of  the  papacy  to  take  advantage  of 
that  which  has  been  done,  and  through  this  to  take  posses- 
sion of  the  country  itself.  Nor  indeed  should  any  one  be 
surprised  at  this  ;  it  was  only  to  be  expected.  For  when 
the  professed  Protestantism  of  the  country,  to  accomplish 
its  lawless  purpose  to  gain  control  of  the  national  power, 
gladly  joined  hands  with  the  Mystery  of  Lawlessness  ;  what 
else  could  be  expected  than  that  she  should  at  once  lay 
claim  to  all  the  "benefits"  to  be  derived  from  the  trans- 


TO  SAVE   THE  NATION.  835 

action  in  itself,  and  press  the  principles  of  the  transaction 
to  the  utmost  limit  of  their  logic  in  her  own  behalf  ? 

As  we  have  before  shown,  the  aim  and  purpose  of  the 
National  Reform  combination  was  identical  with  the  aim 
and  purpose  of  the  papacy.  It  was  therefore  with  great 
gladness  that  Rome  heard  the  declaration  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  that  "this  is  a  Christian  nation," 
with  the  citation  of  Catholic  documents  to  prove  it,  and  also 
saw  Congress  set  up  the  sign  of  her  authority  — the  Sunday 
—  as  the  holy  day  of  the  nation  in  express  exclusion  of  the 
Sabbath  of  the  Lord.  It  was  with  supreme  satisfaction  that 
she  saw  her  own  sign  of  her  own  salvation,  set  up  in  the 
United  States  by  a  national  act  as  a  symbol  of  the  salva- 
tion of  the  nation.2  In  our  opposition  to  the  National  Re- 


2  That  it  was  for  the  salvation  of  the  nation  was  definitely  expressed  in  the 
Senate.  Senator  Hawley  said  :  — 

"This  very  day  and  this  hour,  I  would  not  for  the  wealth  of  ten  exposi- 
tions, have  upon  my  shoulders  the  responsibility  of  having  decided  this  question 
wrongly  upon  what  may  be  a  turning-point  in  the  history  of  the  United  States. 
Open  the  Exposition  on  Sunday,  and  the  flood-gates  are  opened.  ...  I  ask  you 
to  regard  that  which  is  of  immeasurable  importance  in  the  salvation  of  a  nation, 
the  great,  profound  sense  of  religious  obligation."  —  Congressional  Record,  July 
12,  1892,  pp.  6699-6700. 

Senator  Colquitt  said  :  — 

"  Without  legislation  relating  to  the  great  contests  that  are  going  on  in  this 
country,  without  the  interference  of  bayonets,  without  calling  upon  the  militia, 
without  the  marshaling  of  armed  forces,  if  there  is  one  palliative,  if  there  is  one 
preventive,  if  there  is  one  check,  if  there  is  one  remedy  that  is  g^ing  to  cure  all 
of  these  discordant  elements  of  strife  and  bloodshed,  it  is  tht  observance  of  the 
Sabbath  day  and  the  observance  of  the  restraints  of  our  home  in  addition."  — 
Id.,  July  13,  1892,  p.  6755. 

Senator  Frye  said :  — 

"  I  believe  that  the  salvation  of  this  country  depends  upon  the  nearness  to 
which  it  approaches  the  Sabbath  of  the  early  days.  We  have  been  wandering 
from  it  from  time  to  time,  getting  away  from  it.  The  sooner  we  get  back 
to  it  the  better  it  will  be  for  this  republic."  —  Id.,  July  12,  1892,  p.  6703. 

It  is  a  forcible  comment  on  Senator  Colquitt's  speech,  that  whereas  Sunday  was 
thus  set  up  to  save  the  nation  from  "  the  interference  of  bayonets,"  etc.,  one  of 
the  very  first  things  done  by  the  church  leaders  after  the  passage  of  this  act,  was 


836  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

form  movement  we  told  the  National  Reformers  and  all  the 
people,  over  and  over,  that  in  all  their  efforts  and  argu- 
ments they  were  but  playing  into  the  hands  of  Rome  ;  and 
that  their  success  would  be  the  assured  success  of  Rome  in 
this  country.  In  December,  1886,  the  author  of  this  book 
published  in  the  American  Sentinel  the  following  passage 
on  this  subject  :  — 

"Although  the  Catholic  Church  apparently  takes  no  very  active  in- 
terest in  this  movement  itself,  we  may  rest  assured  that  there  is  not  a 
single  writer  nor  a  single  official  of  the  Catholic  Church,  from  the  pope 
to  the  lowest  priest  in  America,  who  ever  '  for  an  instant'  loses  sight  of 
the  movement,  or  of  the  'prescriptions  'which  the  pope  has  given  in  view 
of  it. 

"Then  when  the  matter  comes  to  the  enforcement  of  the  laws,  what 
is  to  hinder  the  Catholics  from  doing  it,  and  that,  too.  in  the  Catholic 
way  ?  Every  priest  in  the  United  States  is  sworn  to  root  out  heresy. 
And  Monsignor  Capel,  in  our  own  cities  and  at  our  very  doors,  defends 
the  'Holy  Inquisition.'3  When  the  refusal  to  observe  Sunday  becomes 
heresy  that  can  be  reached  by  the  law,  what,  then,  is  to  hinder  the 
Catholics  from  rooting  out  the  heresy  ?  Certainly  when  the  National 
Reformers  shall  have  been  compelled  by  the  necessity  of  the  situation  to 
join  hands  with  the  Catholics  to  secure  the  laws  which  they  desire,  it 
would  not  be  in  their  power,  even  were  it  in  their  disposition,  to  repeal 
the  laws  ;  so  there  would  then  be  nothing  left  but  the  enforcement  of  the 
laws  —  by  Catholics,  if  by  nobody  else.  This  view  of  the  case  alone 
ought  to  be  sufficient  to  arouse  every  Protestant  and  every  American  to 
the  most  uncompromising  opposition  to  the  National  Reform  party. 

"  It  is  of  no  use  for  the  National  Reformers  to  say  that  they  will  not 
allow  the  Catholics  to  do  these  things.  For  when  the  National  Reform- 
ers, to  gain  the  ends  which  they  have  in  view,  are  compelled  by  '  the 


to  call  upon  the  president  to  enforce  it  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet ;  and  in  the  year 
1894  the  principal  part  of  the  country  from  ocean  to  ocean  was  marked  with 
"  the  interference  of  bayonets,"  with  "  calling  upon  the  militia,"  and  with  "  the 
marshaling  of  armed  forces."  The  Pharisees  of  oLl  rejected  the  Lord  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  chose  a  robber  instead  to  save  that  nation;  but  their  action  de- 
stroyed the  nation.  The  Pharisees  of  our  day  rejected  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord 
and  chose  a  robber — Sunday  —  in  its  stead,  to  save  this  nation.  But  like 
the  efforts  of  the  Pharisees  before,  instead  of  saving  the  nation,  it  will  destroy 
the  nation. 

3  Archbishop   Corrigan   and   others   did  it  again  at  the   Chicago   Catholic 
Congress,  1893. 


THE  POLITY  OF  ROME.  837 

necessity  of  the  situation,'  to  unite  with  Rome,  having,  by  the  help  of 
Rome,  gained  those  ends,  it  will  be  impossible,  without  the  help  of  Rome, 
either  to  make  them  effective  or  to  reverse  them,  or  to  hinder  Rome 
from  making  them  effective  in  her  own  way.  When  the  thing  is  done, 
it  will  be  too  late  to  talk  of  not  allowing  this  or  that.  The  whole  thing 
will  then  be  sold  into  the  hands  of  Rome,  and  there  will  be  no 
remedy. 

"  Lord  Macaulay  made  no  mistake  when  he  wrote  the  following  :  — 

"  'It  is  impossible  to  deny  that  the  polity  of  the  Church  of  Rome  is 
the  very  masterpiece  of  human  wisdom.  .  .  .  The  experience  of  twelve 
hundred  eventful  years,  the  ingenuity  and  patient  cure  of  forty  genera- 
tions of  statesmen,  have  improved  that  polity  to  such  perfection  that, 
among  the  contrivances  which  have  been  devised  for  deceiving  and  op- 
pressing mankind,  it  occupies  the  highest  place.'  * 

"And  it  is  into  the  hands  of  this  mistress  of  human  deception  and 
oppression  that  the  National  Reformers  deliberately  propose  to  surrender 
the  United  States  government  and  the  American  people.  But  just  as 
surely  as  the  American  people  allow  the  National  Reform  party,  or  any- 
thing else,  out  of  seeming  friendship  for  Christianity,  or  for  any  other 
reason,  to  do  this  thing,  they  are  undone. 

"We  know  that  a  good  many  people  have  regarded  the  American 
Sentinel  as  exerting  itself  to  no  purpose,  because  they  think  there  is  no 
danger  of  the  success  of  National  Reform.  But  in  the  National  Reform 
party,  allied  with  Home,  there  is  danger.  Then  put  with  this  the  almost 
universal  demand  for  more  rigorous  laws,  more  vigorously  enforced,  for 
the  stricter  religious  observance  of  Sunday, —  the  very  thing  above  all 
others  at  which  the  National  Reform  movement  aims, —  the  danger  is  in- 
creased and  is  imminent.  In  view  of  these  facts,  there  is  great  danger 
that  through  the  sophistry  of  the  National  Reform  arguments,  the  ill- 
informed  zeal  of  thousands  upon  thousands  of  people  who  favor  Sunday 
laws  will  be  induced  to  support  the  National  Reform  movement,  and  so 
they  and  the  whole  nation  be  delivered  into  the  hands  of  Rome.  There 
js  danger  in  the  National  Reform  movement.  We  know  it,  and  by  the 
evidences  we  here  give  in  their  own  words,  it  is  high  time  that  the 
American  people  began  to  realize  it. 

"We  say  that  if  the  National  Reformers  and  the  Catholics,  or  any 
others,  want  to  keep  Sunday,  let  them  do  it.  But  Heaven  forefeud  that 
they  shall  ever  succeed  in  securing  the  laws  that  they  ask,  by  which  they 
will  compel  others  to  do  it.  And  we  do  most  devoutly  pray,  God  forbid 
that  they  shall  ever  succeed  in  their  scheme  of  putting  into  the  hands  of 
Rome  the  power  to  enforce  religious  laws,  and  to  correct  heresy.  God 
forbid  that  they  shall  ever  succeed  in  making  free  America  a  slave  to 

Rome. 

4  "  Essays,"  Von  Rankc. 


838  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

"The  success  of  the  National  Reform  movement  is  the  success  of 
Rome.  How  many,  then,  of  the  American  people  are  ready  to  enter 
into  the  National  Reform  scheme  ?  " 

Bear  in  mind  that  this  quotation  was  printed  in  1886. 
And  now  in  view  of  this  we  ask  a  careful  consideration  of 
the  following  important  facts  and  statements :  All  these 
years,  and  even  to  the  very  latest  document  issued  Novem- 
ber, 1893,  the  National  Reform  combination  has  constantly 
presented  as  the  basis,  and  the.  leading  argument,  for  the 
governmental  recognition  of  their  religion,  that  "this  coun- 
try was  settled  by  Christian  men  having  Christian  ends  in 
view."  And  now  that  they  have  secured  their  long-desired 
governmental  recognition  of  "the  Christian  religion,"  the 
Catholic  Church  appropriates  the  argument  bodily,  and 
boldly  declares  that  America  was  first  discovered  and  settled 
by  Catholic  Christian  men,  having  Catholic  Christian  ends 
in  view.  At  the  late  World's  Congress  of  Religions, 
Chicago,  1893,  this  was  made  plain  beyond  all  chance  for 
question.  In  a  paper  read  by  Professor  Thomas  O 'Gor- 
man, of  the  Catholic  University  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  it 
is  presented  more  fully  and  compactly  than  in  any  other 
place  we  have  found,  and  we  shall  therefore  quote  largely 
from  it.  On  this  point  of  the  discovery  and  settlement  of 
America  "by  Christian  men  having  Christian  ends  in 
view,"  he  says  :  — 

"By  right  of  discovery  and  possession,  dating  back  almost  nine  hun- 
dred years,  America  is  Christian.  On  the  waters  of  Lake  Michigan, 
close  to  the  Convent  of  La  Rabida  are  moored  three  Spanish  caravels 
and  a  little  farther  away  one  Viking  ship.  All  three  —  convent, 
caravels,  and  Scandinavian  craft — are  evidences  of  an  acquaintance 
between  America  and  the  church  in  times  when  the  only  Christianity  in 
existence  was  Catholic.  This  fact  is  sufficient  justification  for  a  change 
I  have  allowed  myself  to  make.  In  the  programme,  this  paper  has  for 
title,  'Relation  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  America.'  For  wider 
latitude  and  juster  account,  I  make  it,  '  Relation  of  Christianity  to 
America.' 

"The  strange  Viking  boat  carries  the  relation  to  a  period  antedating 
Columbus  by  almost  five  hundred  years.  About  the  year  1000,  Christian 


THE  CA  TIIO LIC  CHURCH  AND  AMERICA.  839 

colonists  from  Norway  founded  in  Greenland  a  Christian  community, 
which  for  four  hundred  years  —  that  is,  almost  down  to  the  days  of 
Columbus  —  possessed  a  body  of  Catholic  priests  and  a  continuous  line 
of  bishops  in  communion  with  the  popes  of  Rome.  From  Greenland, 
traders  and  missionaries  pushed  westward  to  the  mainland.  Trading 
posts  and  mission  stations,  if  not  permanent  settlements,  arose  on  the 
coasts  of  New  England,  and  the  natural  products  of  this  country  found 
their  way  to  Europe  and  even  to  Rome,  the  capital  of  Christendom,  as 
payment  of  the  Peter  pence  from  the  Catholic  people  of  far-away  Green- 
land and  Vinland.  In  the  showcases  of  the  Convent  of  La  Rahida  in 
your  White  City  are  some  of  the  many  contemporary  documents  which 
prove  these  facts,  and  imply  a  relation  existing  long  before  Columbus, 
between  Rome  and  the  land  that  was  to  become  in  later  ages  the  cradle 
of  the  American  Republic.  For  reasons  which  it  is  not  my  present  task 
to  indicate,  the  intercourse  had  gradually  grown  intermittent,  and  had  all 
but  ceased  when  Columbus  appeared.  At  any  rate,  it  had  never  dawned  on 
the  mind  of  Europe  that  the  far-away  Scandinavian  colony  was  in  a  new 
continent.  Greenland  and  Vinland  were  supposed  to  be  connected  in 
some  way  with  northern  Europe,  and  to  be  a  southern  dip  of  the 
known  continent  into  habitable  western  latitudes  from  uninhabitable 
polar  regions.  So  much  for  the  older  acquaintance  between  the  church 
and  America., 

"AMERICA   DISCOVERED   BY   CATHOLICS. 

"The  Spanish  convent  and  caravels  indicate  a  relation  that  began 
four  hundred  years  ago  ;  a  relation  which  was  to  Europe  the  revelation 
of  a  new  world,  what  the  Scandinavian  relation  had  not  been  ;  a  relation 
that  has  not  ceased  since,  as  had  the  Scandinavian  ;  a  relation  that  at 
first  flitted  like  some  distant  dream  before  the  eyes  of  Spain  in  the 
solemn  halls  of  Salamanca,  that  gradually  took  on  some  faint  reality  be- 
neath the  walls  of  Granada,  in  the  quiet  port  of  Palos,  that  finally  be- 
came fact  on  the  newly-found  shores  of  San  Salvador,  in  the  shadow  of 
the  cross  raised  on  American  soil  by  the  successful  discoverer.  The 
books,  pamphlets,  lectures,  and  articles  written  in  this  Columbian  anni- 
versary prove  beyond  a  candid  doubt  that  the  discovery  of  America 
was  eminently  a  religious  enterprise,  and  that  the  desire  to  spread 
Christianity  was,  I  will  not  say  the  only,  but  the  principal  motive  that 
prompted  the  leaders  engaged  in  that  memorable  venture.  Before  you 
can  strip  the  discovery  of  its  religious  character,  you  must  unchristen 
the  admiral's  flagship  [Santa  Maria],  and  tear  from  her  bulwarks  the 
painting  of  the  patroness  [the  Virgin  Mary],  under  whose  auspices  the 
gallant  craft  plowed  her  way  through  the  terrors  of  the  unknown 
ocean. 


840  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

"  MOTIVES   OF   THE    EARLY   COLONISTS. 

"The  inspiration  that  gave  the  Old  World  a  new  continent  was 
also  the  cause  of  its  colonization  and  civilization.  Various  popes  from 
Alexander  VII,  1493,  to  Leo  XI,  1514,  approved  aud  legalized  discovery 
and  occupation  in  America.  The  purpose  of  their  bulls  was  to  prevent 
or  settle  difficulties  aud  wars  between  rival  claimants  to  the  new  lands. 
The  indirect  results  of  their  intervention  were  of  untold  benefit  to  hu- 
manity. That  intervention  promoted  the  geographical  study  and  knowl- 
edge of  the  globe,  instigated  Magellan's  voyage  around  the  world,  created 
the  partition  of  the  continent,  and  hence  also  the  colonial  system  out  of 
which  this  great  nation  is  born." 

Thus  the  National  Reformers  see  their  fundamental  argu- 
ment appropriated  by  Rome  and  used  to  her  sole  advantage; 
and  not  one  of  them,  nor  yet  all  of  them  together,  can  suc- 
cessfully dispute  it  for  a  moment.  And  so  we  and  they  see 
fulfilled  to-day  that  which  we  have  told  them  all  the  time, 
that  in  all  their  efforts  they  were  but  playing  into  the  hands 
of  Rome. 

Again:  The  National  Reform  combination  .has  always 
made  the  fallacious  claim  that  the  union  of  religion  and  the 
State  is  not  the  union  of  Church  and  State  ;  and  vice 
verm,  the  separation  of  Church  and  State  does  not  mean  the 
separation  of  the  State  from  religion.  This  claim  the 
Catholic  Church  now  appropriates,  and  declares  :  — 

"We  may  truly  say  that  with  us  separation  of  Church  and  State  is 
not  separation  of  the  nation  from  religion."  * 

And  thus  again  we  and  they  see  fulfilled  that  which  we 
told  them  long  ago,  and  repeatedly. 

Again  :  The  National  Reform  combination  has  argued 
that  Sunday  laws,  Thanksgiving  proclamations,  and  other 
official  documents  of  presidents  and  governors,  laws  which 
upheld  "Christian  marriage"  by  prohibiting  polygamy, 
chaplains  in  army  and  navy,  in  Congress  and  legislatures, 
and  decisions  of  courts  that  Christianity  is  part  of  the  com- 
mon law.  —  all  prove  that  this  is  a  Christian  nation.  All 


"THE  STATE'S   CHRISTIANITY."  841 

this  also  the  Catholic  Church  has  adopted  as  proof  of  her 
claims  upon  the  nation.     Professor  O'Gorrnan  continues  :  — 

"  Of  what  I  should  call  the  State's  Christianity,  I  give  the  following 
evidences  :  — 

"Not  only  does  the  federal  government  make  Sunday  a  legal  day 
of  rest  for  all  its  officials,  but  the  States  have  Sunday  laws  which  do  not 
enforce  any  specific  worship,  but  do  guard  the  day's  restfulness.  More- 
over, certain  religious  holy  days  are  made  legal  holidays. 

"Presidents  and  governors  in  official  documents  recognize  the  depen- 
dence of  the  nation  on  God  and  the  duty  of  gratitude  to  him.  .  .  . 

"The  action  of  Congress  in  regard  to  Mormonism  is  an  upholding  of 
the  Christian  marriage,  and  in  all  the  States  bigamy  is  a  crime.  Immor- 
ality is  not  allowed  by  the  civil  power  to  flaunt  itself  in  public,  but  is 
driven  to  concealment,  and  the  decalogue,  inasmuch  as  it  relates  to  the 
social  relations  of  man,  is  enforced. 

"Celebrations  of  a  public  and  official  character,  sessions  of  State 
legislatures  and  Congress  are  opened  with  prayer.  Chaplains  are  ap- 
pointed at  public  expense  for  Congress,  the  army,  the  navy,  the  military 
and  naval  academies,  the  State  legislatures  and  institutions.  .  .  . 

"More  than  once  it-has  been  decided  by  courts  that  we  are  a  Chris- 
tian people,  and  that  Christianity  is  part  of  our  unwritten  law,  as  it  is 
part  of  the  common  law  of  England. 

"Such,  briefly,  is  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  the  American 
Republic,  when  we  consider  only  its  internal  life.  Are  we  not  justified 
in  concluding  that  here  Christianity  has  added  to  her  domain  a  nation 
which  is  the  most  active,  the  most  progressive,  and  not  the  least  intel- 
lectual in  this  nineteenth  century  !  " 

When  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  by  the  term  "  Chris- 
tianity." Professor  O'Gorman  means  Catholicism,  and 
Catholicism  alone,  the  force  of  this  array  of  National  Re- 
form "evidences'"'  is  clearly  seen  and  appreciated. 

Again  :  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  de- 
clared that  "  we  are  a  religious  people,"  and  that  "  this  is  a 
Christian  nation."  This  the  National  Reform  combination 
hailed  as  containing  "all  that  the  National  Reform  Asso- 
ciation seeks  ; "  and  this  they  have  been  using  ever  since  as 
the  official  and  ultimate  authority  that  must  settle  every  ques- 
tion and  silence  every  word  of  doubt  or  dissent.  As  proofs 
of  its  declaration  that  "this  is  a  Christian  nation,"  and  that 


842  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

this  is  the  meaning  of  the  Constitution,  the  Supreme  Court 
not  only  cited  the  commission  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  to 
Columbus,  but  also  "the  form  of  oath  universally  prevail- 
ing ; "  the  laws  respecting  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath ; 
the  constitutional  proviso  "that  the  Executive  shall  have  ten 
days  (Sunday  excepted)  within  which  to  determine  whether 
he  will  approve  or  veto  a  bill,"  etc.  This  whole  ground  is 
covered  in  just  two  sentences  by  Professor  O'Gorman,  with 
direct  reference  to  the  Constitution,  as  follows  :  — 

"  Our  political  charter  presupposes  God  and  Christianity,  presup- 
poses the  main  facts  and  the  past  history  of  Christianity,  and  is  bound  to 
them  "  by  discovery  and  colonisation.  The  oath  required  from  all  officers  of 
the  federal  government,  the  exemption  of  Sunday  from  their  working 
days,  the  subscription,  '  In  the  year  of  our  Lord '  are  a  recognition  of 
God,  and  imply  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  turning-point  of  hu- 
manity, the  source  and  beginning  of  a  new  order." 

Once  more  :  The  Supreme  Court  also  cited  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  as  proof  that  this  is  a  Christian  nation. 
Professor  O'Gorman  follows  to  the  same  extreme,  and  then 
declares  that  the  Catholic  Church  is  the  foundation  of  it  all. 
Here  are  his  words  :  — 

"Look  at  the  fundamental  articles,  the  formative  principles  of  the 
republic, —  'All  men  are  created  equal;  they  are  endowed  by  their 
Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights  ;  among  these  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness  ;  to  secure  these,  governments  are  insti- 
tuted among  men,  deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the 
governed.'  These  are  Christian  principles  asserting  God,  creation,  the 
rights  of  the  creature,  and  by  implication  the  duties  that  are  correl- 
ative to  those  rights.  To  these  principles  the  Catholic  Church  gave  an  im- 
pregnable foundation  when  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  she  defined  that 
reason  is  not  totally  obscured,  and  will  is  not  totally  depraved." 

Then  in  his  closing  sentences  he  sums  up  all,  covers  the 
whole  ground,  and  swallows  up  everything  into  the  Catholic 
Church,  as  follows  :  — 

"Our  roots  are  in  the  good  ;  our  up-growth  must  needs  be  toward 
the  better.  The  affirmation  of  any  one  truth,  logically  followed  out, 
leads  to  the  knowledge  and  affirmation  of  all  truth.  The  American 
Republic  began  in  the  affirmation  of  certain  fundamental  evident  truths 


THE  NATION'S  PERFECTION.  843 

of  reason  ;  our  dominant  tendency,  therefore,  the  law  of  our  progression, 
is  toward  complete  truth,  if  we  but  remain  true  to  the  spirit  that  called 
us  into  being,  and  still,  thank  God,  animates  our  present  living. 

"We  believe  that  divine  Providence  led  to  the  discovery  of  this  con- 
tinent and  directed  its  settlement  and  guided  the  birth  of  this  nation,  for 
a  new  and  more  complete  application  to  political  society  of  the  truths 
affirmed  by  reason  and  Christian  revelation,  for  the  upbuilding  of  a 
nation  as  great  religiously  as  it  is  politically,  of  a  nation  that  shall  find 
its  perfection  in  Catholic  Christianity.  With  that  freedom  allowed  every 
speaker  in  this  Parliament  of  Religions,  I  affirm  my  sincere  conviction  that 
Catholic  Christianity  is  the  fullness  of  truth,  natural  and  supernatural, 
rational  and  revealed  ;  that  Catholic  Christianity  is  the  strongest  bulwark 
of  law  and  order  in  this  republic.  If  ever  our  country  should  fail 
and  fall,  it  is  not  from  the  Catholic  Church  that  shall  come  the  shout  of 
triumph  at  the  failure  and  the  fall,  for  never  has  she  had  a  fairer  field  of 
work  than  the  United  States  of  America." 

Thus  Rome  sets  herself  forward  as  the  end  and  all,  and 
hers  the  prior  and  supreme  right,  in  all  things  pertaining 
to  this  union  of  '.'religion  and  the  State,"  in  this  "Chris- 
tian nation  of  the  United  States.".  And  the  blindness 
of  professed  Protestants  and  of  the  Supreme  Court 
has  given  her  the  complete  legal,  legislative,  and  gov- 
ernmental basis  for  all  her  claims.  And  we  say  again 
that  there  is  not  one  person  in  the  National  Reform  combi- 
nation, nor  in  the  whole  combination  together  ;  not  one 
member  of  the  Supreme  Court,  nor  yet  the  whole  court  to- 
gether; who  can  successfully  dispute  the  argument  or  the 
claim  Rome  is  now  making  upon  the  foundation  which  they 
themselves  have  so  surely  laid  for  her.  And  so  we  and 
they  see  fulfilled  to-day  before  the  eyes  of  the  whole  nation, 
and  of  the  world,  that  which  we  have  all  the  time  told  them, 
that  they  were  only  playing  into  the  hands  of  Rome.  To- 
day Rome  is  profiting  by  that  in  which  the  National  Re- 
formers have  always  fondly  hoped  they  themselves  might 
be  profited. 

And  Rome  knows  it  ;  and  all  these  assumptions  and 
logical  claims  from  National  Reform  and  Supreme  Court, 
premises,  arguments,  and  declarations,  she  also  backs  up 


844  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

with  the  publicly-announced  plan  of  Leo  XIII,  with  respect 
to  the  United  States  and  through  this  for  Europe  and  "all 
humanity,"  as  follows  :  — 

"In  hia  [Pope  Leo's]  view,  the  United  States  has  reached  the  period 
when  it  becomes  necessary  to  bring  about  the  fusion  of  all  the  heteroge- 
neous elements  in  one  homogeneous  and  indissoluble  nation.  ...  It  is 
for  this  reason  that  the  pope  wants  the  Catholics  to  prove  themselves 
the  most  enlightened  and  most  devoted  workers  for  national  unity  and 
political  assimilation.  .  .  .  America  feels  the  need  of  this  work  of  in- 
ternal fusion.  .  .  .  What  the  church  has  done  in  the  past  for  others,  she  will 
do  for  the  United  States.  .  .  .  That  is  the  reason  the  Holy  See  encourages 
the  American  clergy  to  guard  jealously  the  solidarity,  and  to  labor  for 
the  fusion  of  all  the  foreign  and  heterogeneous  elements  into  one  vast 
national  family.  .  .  . 

"Finally,  Leo  XIII  desires  to  see  strength  in  that  unity.  Like  all 
intuitive  souls,  he  hails  in  the  united  American  States  and  in  their  young 
and  flourishing  church,  the  source  of  new  life  for  Europeans.  He  wants 
America  to  be  powerful,  in  order  that  Europe  may  regain  strength  from 
borrowing  a  rejuvenated  type.  Europe  is  closely  watching  the  United 
States.  .  .  .  Henceforth  we  [Europeans]  will  need  authors  who  will 
place  themselves  on  this  ground  ;  '  What  can  we  borrow,  and  what 
ought  we  to  borrow  from  the  United  States  for  our  social,  political,  and 
ecclesiastical  reorganization  f '  The  answer  depends  in  great  measure 
upon  the  development  of  American  destinies.  If  the  United  States  suc- 
ceed in  solving  the  many  problems  that  puzzle  us,  Europe  will  follow  her 
example,  and  this  outpouring  of  light  will  mark  a  date  in  the  history  not 
only  of  the  United  States,  BUT  OF  ALL  HUMANITY. 

"That  is  why  the  holy  father,  anxious  for  peace  and  strength,  col- 
laborates with  passion  in  the  work  of  consolidation  and  development  in 
American  affairs.  According  to  him,  the  church  ought  to  be  the  chosen 
crucible  for  the  moulding  and  absorption  of  races  into  one  united  family. 
And  that,  especially,  is  the  reason  why  he  labors  at  the  codification  of 
ecclesiastical  affairs,  in  order  that  this  distant  member  of  Christianity  may 
infuse  new  blood  into  the  old  organism." 6 

And  this  was  swiftly  followed  by  the  establishment  of 
Satolli  as  permanent  apostolic  delegate  here  to  carry  out  this 
plan  ;  and, Satolli  openly  declared  at  the  Catholic  Congress 
in  Chicago,  September  5,  1893,  not  only  that  this  is  his  place 
and  work  here,  but  commanded  the  Catholics  of  the  United 
6  Letter  from  the  Vatican  to  the  New  York  Sun,  July  11,  1892. 


LEO'S   CHARGE  AND  8ATOLLFS  MISSION.          845 

States    to    carry    out    this    scheme.       His    words    are    as 
follows:  — 

"In  the  name  of  Leo  XIII,  I  salute  the  great  American  republic, 
and  I  call  upon  the  Catholics  of  America  to  go  forward,  in  one  hand 
bearing  the  book  of  Christian  truth,  and  in  the  other  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States.  .  .  . 

"To-day  this  is  the  duty  of  the  Catholics:  To  bring  into  the 
world  the  fullness  of  supernatural  truth  and  supernatural  life.  This 
especially  is  the  duty  of  a  Catholic  Congress.  There  are  the  nations 
who  have  never  separated  from  the  church,  but  who  have  neglected 
often  to  apply  in  full  degree  the  lessons  of  the  gospel.  There  are  the 
nations  who  have  gone  out  from  the  church,  bringing  with  them  many  of 
her  treasures,  and  because  of  what  they  have  brought,  shedding  partial 
light.  But  cut  off  from  the  source,  unless  that  source  is  again  brought 
into  close  contact  with  them,  there  is  danger  for  the  future. 

"Bring  them  in  contact  with  their  past  by  your  action  and  teaching. 
Bring  your  fellow-countrymen,  bring  your  country  into  immediate  contact, 
icith  that  great  secret  of  blessedness — Christ  and  7iis  church.  And  in 
this  manner  shall  it  come  to  pass  the  word  of  the  psalmist  shall  be 
fulfilled:  'Mercy  and  justice  have  met  one  another,  justice  and  peace 
have  kissed.'  .  .  . 

"Now  all  these  great  principles  have  been  marked  out  in  most 
illuminous  lines  in  the  encyclicals  of  the  great  pontiff,  Leo  XIII.  He  has 
studied  them.  Hold  fast  to  them  as  the  safest  anchorage,  and  all  will  be 
well.  These  several  questions  are  studied  the  world  over.  It  is  well 
they  be  studied  in  America,  for  here  in  America  do  we  have  more  than 
elsewhere  the  key  to  the  future.  [Applause.] 

"  Here  in  America  you  have  a  country  blessed  specially  by  Provi- 
dence in  the  fertility  of  field  and  the  liberty  of  its  Constitution.  [Loud 
applause.]  Here  you  have  a  country  which  will  repay  all  efforts  [loud 
and  prolonged  applause]  not  merely  tenfold,  but,  aye  a  hundredfold. 
And  this  no  one  understands  better  than  the  immortal  Leo.  And  he 
charges  me,  his  delegate,  to  speak  out  to  America  words  of  hope  and 
blessing,  words  of  joy.  Go  forward  !  in  one  hand  bearing  the  book  of 
Christian  truth — the  Bible  —  and  in  the  other  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States."  [Tremendous  applause,  the  people  rising  to  their  feet.] 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  as  it  was  made, 
and  as  it  was  intended  by  its  makers  to  remain,  was  directly 
opposed  to  every  principle  and  every  purpose  of  Rome. 
The  founders  of  the  government  of  the  United  States  said 
that  "  to  judge  for  ourselves  and  to  engage  in  the  exercise  of 


846  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

religion  agreeably  to  the  dictates  of  our  own  consciences  is 
an  unalienable  right,  which,  upon  the  principles  on  which 
the  gospel  was  first  propagated,  and  the  reformation  from 
popery  carried  on,  can  never  be  transferred  to  another." 
They  said  further  that  "  it  is  impossible  for  the  magistrate 
to  adjudge  the  right  of  preference  among  the  various  sects 
which  profess  the  Christian  faith,  without  erecting  a  claim  to 
infallibility  which  would  lead  us  lack  to  the  Church  of  Rome." 
Thus  certainly  did  the  makers  of  this  government  intend  that 
the  people  of  the  United  States  should  never,  by  any  act  of 
the  government,  be  led  back  to  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and 
thus  certainly  did  they  intend  that  the  government  of  the 
United  States  should  never  touch  any  question  of  religion, 
and  specifically  ' '  the  Christian  religion, "  in  order  that  their 
expressed  purpose  might  prevail, —  that  the  people  should 
not  be  led  back  to  the  Church  of  Rome  and  popery. 

And  the  Constitution,  as  our  fathers  made  it  and  in- 
tended it,  no  Catholic  was  ever  commanded  by  any  pope  to 
take  in  one  hand,  with  the  Catholic  Bible  in  the  other. 
But  when  that  Constitution  was  interpreted  to  mean  that 
"this  is  a  Christian  nation;"  when  that  Constitution  was 
interpreted  according  to  Rome's  principles,  and  the  sign  of 
her  authority,  with  Catholic  documents,  was  cited  to  support 
this  interpretation,  then  it  was,  and  not  till  then,  that  all 
Catholics  were  commanded  to  take  this  Catholic  Constitu- 
tion in  one  hand,  and  the  Catholic  Bible  in  the  other,  and, 
with  Satolli  at  their  head,  go  forward  to  their  "hundred- 
fold "  reward  in  the  United  States,  and  through  this  bring 
again  "  all  Europe  "  and  "  all  humanity  "  back  into  immedi- 
ate contact  with  "  the  church." 

And  now  with  the  Catholic  Bible  in  one  hand,  and  the 
Catholic  Constitution  of  the  United  States  in  the  other,  the 
Catholic  Church  steps  forth  and  declares  that  this  is  a  Catho- 
lic Christian  nation.  The  arguments  which  the  National 
Reformers  have  used  all  these  years  to  prove  that  this  is 


-STAMPED  FOR  A   CATHOLIC  LAND."  847 

a  Christian  nation,  she  now  boldly  appropriates,  and  says 
that  they  mean  that  this  is  a  Catholic  Christian  nation. 
All  the  claims  which  the  National  Reform  combination 
has  presented  for  the  governmental  recognition  of  religion, 
the  Catholic  Church  now  adopts,  and  declares  as  the  conse- 
quence that  it  is  governmental  recognition  of  the  Catholic 
religion. 

And  with  all  this  prestige  and  power  already  within  her 
grasp,  she  grows  enthusiastic,  and  is  now  circulating  official 
documents  in  the  United  States,  in  which  she  openly  an- 
nounces the  "collapse  of  Protestantism,'' and  her  hope  to 
"missionize"  the  United  States  "in  half  a  decade;"  and 
at  the  same  time  abruptly  challenges  all  Protestants  to  show 
why  they  keep  Sunday.  And  to  cap  it  all,  she  publishes  to 
the  people  of  the  United  States  the  following,  which  she 
herself  pronounces  "bold  doctrines  to  preach  to  Ameri- 
cans :  "  — 

"  The  friends  of  Catholicity  assure  us  that,  as  God  in  his  providence 
creates  a  new  soul  for  every  human  body  that  is  born  into  the  world, 
so  the  American  republic  was  no  sooner  born  from  the  womb  of  time 
than  he  in  like  manner  created  a  spiritual  republic  to  be  its  com- 
panion, its  protector,  and  infallible  guide  through  all  the  years  of  its 
existence. 

"They  tell  us  furthermore  that  as  the  soul  can  live  without  the 
body,  but  the  body  cannot  live  without  the  soul,  so  the  church  can  live 
without  the  republic,  but  the  republic  cannot  live  without  the  church. 
In  a  word,  that  the  church  is  necessary  to  the  republic,  and  without  her 
spiritual  guidance,  the  republic  must  inevitably  fail,  as  have  all  the 
ancient  republics  of  history  before  her.  .  .  . 

"Is  not  this  whole  country  stamped  for  a  Catholic  land  ?  With  the 
great  doctor,  St.  Augustine  guarding  the  Atlantic  Coast,  and  the  heroic 
missionary,  San  Francisco,  the  Pacific  ;  with  the  indomitable  apostle, 
St.  Paul,  kindling  zeal  and  enthusiasm  in  the  North,  and  the  gentle  San 
Antonio  inspiring  love  and  peace  in  the  South  ;  with  the  warrior  king, 
St.  Louis,  in  the  center,  and  the  great  St.  Joseph  and  Notre  Dame,  the 
gracious  queen  of  heaven,  hard  by, —  with  all  these  powerful  intercessors 
pleading  for  her,  can  we,  I  say,  expect  anything  less  than  a  glorious 
triumph  for  Catholicity  in  America  ? 
62 


848  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

"Surely  God's  plans  are  manifest.  America  is  the  last  and  greatest 
of  nations,  and  he  means  to  possess  her  for  himself.  .  .  .  The  nets  of 
St.  Peter  will  drag  this  continent  from  ocean  to  ocean,  till  they  are  filled 
to  breaking  with  the  souls  of  men  that  shall  be  saved."  7 

Immediately  following  these  manifestations  in  the 
World's  Parliament  of  Religions,  carne  the  celebration  of 
Cardinal  Gibbons's  jubilee,  October  18,  19,  1893,  at  which 
the  union  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  American  State 
was  deftly  announced,  by  Archbishop  Ireland,  with  some 
other  statements  that  are  worthy  of  note  in  this  connection. 

At  the  celebration,  Archbishop  Ireland  delivered  a  pane- 
gyric upon  Cardinal  Gibbons,  in  which  he  joined  Leo  XIII 
and  the  cardinal  together  as  links  which  are  to  bind  together 
"the  church  and  the  age,"  and  himself  gave  the  definition 
of  his  expression,  "The  church  and  the  age,"  thus  :  "Rome 
is  the  church;  America  is  tfie  age. "  With  this  specific  defini- 
tion, there  will  be  no  difficulty  in  seeing  the  archbishop's 
meaning  in  the  extracts  which  we  shall  present. 

Speaking  evidently  of  the  cardinal,  the  archbishop  said : — 

"  I  indicate  the  opportunity  for  the  great  and  singular  churchman. 
His  work  is  to  bridge  the  deep  valley  separating  the  age  from  the 
church,  to  clear  off  the  clouds  which  prevent  the  one  from  seeing  the 
realities  of  the  other,  to  bring  the  church  to  the  age  and  the  age  to 
the  church." 

With  Rome  as  the  church,  and  America  as  the  age,  it  is 
clear  that  the  archbishop's  speech  is  in  the  direct  line  of 
SatollTs  instructions  from  Leo  to  the  Catholics  of  America 
to  bring  their  "country  into  immediate  contact  with"  "the 
church." 

The  archbishop  continues  :  — 

"I  preach  the  new,  the  most  glorious  crusade.  Church  and  age  ! 
Unite  them  in  mind  and  heart,  in  the  name  of  humanity,  in  the  name  of 
God.  Church  and  age  !  Bring  them  into  close  contact  ;  they  pulsate 
alike  ;  the  God  of  humanity  works  in  one,  the  God  of  supernatural  reve- 
lation works  in  the  other  —  in  both  the  selfsame  God." 


7  "  The  Catholic  Church  and  the  American  Republic,  Historically,  Analytic- 
ally, and  Prophetically  Considered,"  1893,  pp.  2,  3,  15,  16. 


ROME  AND  AMERICA.  849 

And  of  course  for  all  the  purposes  of  this  design,  this 
"crusade,"  and  of  those  engaged  in  it,  the  pope  is  this  god 
who  works  in  both  "the  church  and  the  age." 

This  is  more  clearly  indicated  in  another  place  in  the 
archbishop's  speech,  as  follows  :  — 

"  Surely  much  yet  is  to  be  done  before  the  union  of  age  and  church 
is  complete,  but  the  work  has  begun  and  has  progressed  to  a  surprising 
degree.  Let  us  pray  that  Leo  may  live  yet  many  years,  and  that  when 
death  at  last  comes,  Leo's  spirit  may  yet  dominate  in  the  Vatican,  and  all 
will  be  well.  Meanwhile,  in  America,  let  Catholics  of  America  cluster 
around  him,  inhale  his  ideas  and  work  with  him,  as  Americans  should 
work,  in  energy  and  earnestness.  We  are  especially  favored  by  him. 
He  lives  among  us  in  an  especial  manner,  having  sent  to  us  his  chosen  rep- 
resentative, who  makes  Leo  known  to  us  as  no  other  could,  whose  words, 
whose  acts,  prove  to  us  daily  how  truly  Leo  is  pontiff  of  the  age.  Mon- 
signor  Satolli,  the  church  and  the  age  !  ROME  IS  THE  CHURCH ; 
AMERICA  IS  THE  AGE !  And  Monsignor  Satolli's  command  to 
Catholics  of  America  is  :  '  Go  forward,  on  the  road  of  progress,  bear- 
ing in»one  hand  the  book  of  Christian  truth  —  Christ's  gospel — and  in 
the  other  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.'" 

Next  the  archbishop  turns  personally  to  the  cardinal, 
and  defines  his  place,  thus  :  - 

"I  have  spoken  of  the  providential  pope  of  Rome.  I  speak  now  of 
the  providenital  archbishop  of  Baltimore  How  oft,  in  past  years,  I 
have  thanked  God  that  in  this  latter  quarter  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
Cardinal  Gibbons  had  been  given  to  us  as  primate,  as  leader,  Catholic  of 
Catholics,  American  of  Americans,  a  bishop  of  his  age  and  to  his  country; 
he  is  to  America  what  Leo  is  to  all  Christendom.  ...  A  particular 
mission  is  reserved  to  the  American  cardinal.  .  .  .  America  is  watched? 
The  prelate  who  in  America  is  the  representative  of  the  union  of  church 
and  age  is  watched.  His  leadership  guides  the  combatants  the  world 
over.  .  .  .  The  ripplings  of  Cardinal  Gibbons's  influence  cross  the 
threshold  of  the  Vatican.  .  .  .  The  historic  incident  of  the  Knights  of 
Labor,  whose  condemnation  Cardinal  Gibbons  averted  by  personal  in; 
terview  with  Leo,  was  one  of  the  preparations  to  the  encyclical  on  the 
Condition  of  Labor. 

"The  work  of  Cardinal  Gibbons  forms  an  epoch  in  the  history  of 
the  church  in  America.  He  has  made  known,  as  no  one  before  him  did, 
the  church  to  the  people  of  America  ;  he  has  demonstrated  the  fitness  of 
the  church  for  America,  the  natural  alliance  existing  between  the  church 


850        WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS/ 

and  the  freedom-giving  institutions  of  America.  Through  his  action  the 
scales  have  fallen  from  the  eyes  of  non-Catholics,  prejudices  have  van- 
ished. He,  the  great  churchman,  is  the  great  citizen.  Church  and  country 
unite  in  him,  and  the  magnetism  of  the  union  pervades  the  whole  land, 
teaching  laggard  Catholics  to  love  America,  teaching  well-disposed  non- 
Catholics  to  trust  tJie  church." 

Nor  is  this  all  theory,  nor  simply  the  grandiloquence  of  a 
set  panegyric.  For  before  that  celebration  was  over,  there 
was  furnished  an  object-lesson,  which,  whether  it  was  pre- 
arranged or  .not,  was  seized  upon  and  made  to  tell  for  all  the 
occasion  was  worth,  and  in  Rome's  hand  it  is  worth  a  great 
deal.  The  next  night  after  this  speech  was  made,  a  grand 
banquet  was  held  in  honor  of  the  cardinal  and  the  occasion. 
At  that  banquet  the  vice-president  of  the  United  States  sat 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  cardinal.  And  in  response  to  loud 
calls  for  a  speech  at  the  table,  Archbishop  Ireland  made  use 
of  this  situation  to  the  following  effect :  — 

* 

"I  do  not  know  whether  or  not  you  appreciate  the  full  value  of  THE 
UNION  YOU  SEE  TYPIFIED  HERE  TO-NIGHT,  THE  UNION  OP 
THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH  AND  AMERICA,  the  fraternity  between 
the  church  and  the  non-Catholics  of  the  nation.  The  vice-president  of 
the  United  States  comes  here  and  takes  his  seat  alongside  the  cardinal. 
This  spirit  of  fraternity  BETWEEN  CHURCH  AND  STATE,  THUS 
TYPIFIED,  is  the  result  of  the  work  of  our  American  cardinal.  .  .  . 
In  this  freest  of  democracies  it  was  his  providential  mission  to  prove 
that  the  Catholic  Church  is  at  home.  .  .  .  Of  this  our  cardinal  is  proof  to 
all  men,  to  all  the  world.  ...  I  wish  for  him  many  years  of  life  for  the 
sake  of  the  church  and  for  the  sake  of  the  country  —  that  he  may  go  to 
work  even  more  vigorously,  bringing  into  closer  contact  the  old  church 
and  the  new  democracy."  8 

Another  thing  which  is  giving  the  papacy  an  opportunity 
constantly  to  put  itself  forward  in  the  United  States  both  to 
magnify  itself  and  to  exalt  Sunday,  is  the  universal  labor 
troubles  and  their  attendant  lawlessness.  When  in  March, 
1890,  the  emperor  of  Germany  appointed  his  "International 
Labor  Conference,"  he  not  only  appointed  the  Roman 

8  These  quotations  are  all  taken  from  the  Catholic  Times,  of  Philadelphia, 
October  21, 1893. 


ROME  AND  LABOR  TROUBLES.  851 

Catholic  prince-bishop,  of  Breslau,  as  his  personal  dele- 
gate, but  sent  a  personal  letter  to  the  pope,  asking  him  to 
take  an  interest  in  the  conference;  to  "  follow  with  sym- 
pathy the  progress  of  the  deliberations;"  and  to  lend  his 
"benevolent  support  to  the  work."  In  reply,  the  pope  took 
particular  pains  to  remind  the  emperor  of  "the  teaching  of 
the  Catholic  Church  of  which  We  are  the  head  ; "  to  suggest 
among  other  subjects  for  consideration  by  the  conference 
the  subject  of  "  rest  on  the  Lord '«<?  day  /  "  and  to  inform  his 
majesty  that  "the  successful  solution  of  a  matter  of  this  im- 
portance will  require,  besides  the  wise  intervention  of  the 
civil  authority,  the  powerful  co-operation  of  religion  and  the 
benevolent  intervention  of  the  church."  Accordingly,  the 
conference  made  a  demand  for  Sunday  observance  a  part 
of  its  platform. 

In  his  Encyclical  of  May  15,  1891,  on  "The  Condition 
of  Labor,"  which  was  evidently  written  with  an  eye  toward 
the  United  States  more  than  any  other  country,  the  pope 
again  takes  occasion  to  declare  to  all  the  world  that  — 

"No  practical  solution  of  this  question  will  ever  be  found  without  the 
assistance  of  religion  and  the  church.  It  is  we  who  are  the  chief 
guardian  of  religion,  and  the  chief  dispenser  of  what  belongs  to  the 
church  ;  and  we  must  not  by  silence  neglect  the  duty  which  lies  upon 
us.  ...  We  affirm  without  hesitation  that  all  the  striving  of  men  will  be 
vain  if  they  leave  out  the  church.  It  is  the  church  that  proclaims  from 
the  gospel  those  teachings  by  which  the  conflict  can  be  put  an  end  to, 
or  at  least  made  far  less  bitter;  the  church  uses  its  efforts  not  only  to 
enlighten  the  mind,  but  to  direct  by  its  precepts  the  life  and  conduct  of 
men  ;  .  .  .  and  acts  on  the  decided  view  that  for  these  purposes  recourse 
should  be  had,  in  due  measure  and  degree,  to  the  help  of  the  law  and  of 
State  authority. 

"No  man  may  outrage  with  impunity  that  human  dignity  which 
God  himself  treats  with  reverence,  nor  stand  in  the  way  of  that  higher 
life  which  is  the  preparation  for  the  eternal  life  of  heaven.  Nay,  more, 
a  man  has  here  no  power  over  himself.  To  consent  to  any  treatment 
which  is  calculcated  to  defeat  the  end  and  purpose  of  his  being,  is  be- 
yond his  right ;  he  cannot  give  up  his  soul  to  servitude  ;  for  it  is  not 


852  WHAT  SHALL   BE    THE  RESULTS? 

man's  own  rights  which  are  here  in  question,  but  the  rights  of  God, 
most  sacred  and  inviolable.  From  this  follows  the  obligation  of  the  cessa- 
tion of  work  and  labor  on  Sundays  and  certain  festivals.  This  rest  from 
labor  is  not  to  be  understood  as  mere  idleness  ;  much  less  must  it  be  an 
occasion  of  spending  money  and  of  vicious  excess,  as  many  would  desire 
it  to  be  ;  but  it  should  be  rest  from  labor  consecrated  by  religion."  • 

In  times  of  such  difficulties  as  these,  it  is  with  peculiar 
force  that  the  papacy  suggests  itself  to  the  minds  of  rulers 
and  statesmen  as  the  source  of  the  greatest  help.  In 
times  of  anarchy  and  revolution,  when  the  very  foundations 
of  States,  and  even  of  society  itself,  seem  to  be  moved,  it  is 
almost  instinctively  that  the  European  statesman  grasps  the 
hand  of  the  papacy.  The  papacy  has  passed  through  revo- 
lution after  revolution,  and  complete  anarchy  itself  is  no 
terror  to  her.  She  saw  the  fall  of  the  Roman  empire.  And 
as  that  empire  was  the  "mightiest  fabric  of  human  great- 
ness "  ever  seen  by  man,  so  its  fall  was  the  most  fearful  ever 
seen  in  history.  Yet  the  papacy  not  only  passed  through 
it  all,  but  she  gathered  new  strength  from  it  all. 

The  papacy  thrives  on  revolutions  ;  the  perplexities  of 
States  are  her  fortune  ;  to  her,  anarchy  is  better  than  order, 
unless  she  can  rule.  Therefore,  when  revolution  is  immi- 
nent, and  anarchy  threatens,  it  is  almost  instinctively  that 
the  European  statesman  grasps  the  hand  of  her  who  has  sur- 
vived the  anarchy  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  revolutions  of 
fifteen  centuries.  And  when  America  is  seen  accepting 
her  offices,  and  recognizing  her  power,  Europe  will  readily 
follow  the  example.  Thus  lawlessness  of  every  kind  only 
aids  in  the  aggrandizement  of  the  papacy. 

The  labor  troubles  are  deepening  everywhere  each  suc- 
ceeding year  ;  as  also  socialism  becomes  more  widespread 
and  anarchy  more  bold.  As  these  troubles  deepen,  the 
influence  of  the  papacy  rises  ;  and  as  the  influence  of  the 
papacy  rises,  the  enforced  observance  of  Sunday  is  more 
generally  and  more  strongly  insisted  upon. 


THE  "SAVIOUR  FROM  THE    VATICAN."  853 

All  this  only  gives  the  papacy  the  opportunity  to 
announce  as  she  did  by  Bishop  Watterson  at  the  Catholic 
Congress  at  Chicago,  that  — 

"  If  society  is  to  be  saved  from  a  condition  worse  in  some  respects  than 
that  of  pagan  times,  it  is  from  the  Vatican  the  saviour  must  come." 

Thus  all  these  statements  concerning  the  close  relations 
between  "the  church,"  "Christianity,"  "religion,"  etc., 
and  America,  the  United  States,  etc.,  are  made  and  repeated 
upon  every  possible  occasion  for  a  definite  and  set  purpose. 
The  spirit  of  aggression  and  usurpation  is  the  very  life 
of  Romanism.  And  all  these  are  but  the  first  soft,  pur- 
ring steps  in  the  carrying  forward  to  complete  accom- 
plishment, the  aims  and  orders  of  Leo,  through  Satolli, 
to  bring  this  "  country  into  immediate  contact  with  the  great 
source  of  blessedness,"  the  Catholic  Church.  These  state- 
ments, which  taken  alone,  and  merely  by  themselves,  might 
appear  quite  harmless,  when  taken  in  view  of  the  definite 
orders  of  Leo,  the  presence  of  Satolli,  and  the  very  spirit  of 
life  of  the  papacy  which  is  aggression  and  usurpation,  then 
every  one  has  in  it  a  world  of  meaning. 

These  statements  are  made  and  often  repeated  for  the 
purpose  that  they  shall  be  hereafter  used  as  the  foundation 
upon  which  to  build  open,  positive,  and  decided  movements 
in  matters  of  interference  in  governmental  affairs  and  use  of 
governmental  power.  And  then  when  these  later  move- 
ments shall  have  been  made  so  openly  that  their  evident 
purpose  can  be  clearly  seen  by  all,  and  any  protest  is  raised, 
she  will  calmly  point  to  these  statements  and  claims  so  often 
made  in  the  presence  of  all  without  any  protest;  and  then 
she  will  say  that  silence  when  these  statements  were  so  often 
and  so  openly  made,  was  consent  that  they  were  true  ;  and 
those  things  being  thus  confessedly  true,  the  later  and  open 
movements  follow  as  the  natural  consequence.  Upon  this 
ground  she  will  impudently  claim  as  of  divine  and  natural 


854  WHAT  SHALL  BE  TUB  RESULTS? 

right,  that  which  she  has  usurped  from  beginning  to  end, 
and  will  coolly  observe  to  all  who  then  resent  it,  that  they 
ought  to  have  let  their  voices  be  heard  at  the  beginning ; 
but  that  having  by  silence,  already  and  so  long,  consented, 
now  it  is  too  late  ;  possession  has  been  acquired,  and  it  is  too 
late  for  dispute. 

This  is  precisely  what  this  is  done  for,  and  this  is  the  use 
that  will  be  made  of  it  in  later  situations.  This  is  the  work- 
ing of  the  Romish  spirit  from  the  beginning  of  her  exist- 
ence. Concession  in  order  to  exaction  ;  insinuation  in 
order  to  usurpation  ;  aggression  in  order  to  domination  ; 
everything  in  order  to  absolute  possession  for  purposes  of 
unmitigated  oppression  —  this  is  the  history  of  Rome  and 
Romanism  from  the  beginning,  and  this  is  and  will  be  her 
disposition  and  her  course  in  connection  with  the  United 
States  government  to-day  and  forward. 

Thus  by  all  the  evidence  on  the  question,  it  is  demon- 
strated that  upon  the  arguments  furnished,  and  the  govern- 
mental action  secured  by  the  National  Reform  combination, 
the  Catholic  Church  now  claims,  and  with  all  her  native 
arrogance  assumes,  actual  possession  of  the  United  States. 
With  the  mouths  of  the  Protestants,  and  Congress,  and  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  the  executive,  completely  stopped  by 
their  own  arguments  and  actions  flaunted  in  their  faces  and 
before  the  whole  country,  by  the  Catholic  Church,  this 
country  to-day  is  practically  held  by  the  Catholic  Church, 
to  be  used  for  the  furtherance  of  her  designs  concerning 
Europe  and  all  humanity. 

Some  at  least  of  the  prominent  ones  in  this  National 
Reform  combination  were  able  soon  to  see  the  advantage 
that  Rome  had  so  promptly  taken  of  their  success  and  the 
use  that  she  proposes  to  make 'of  it,  and  began  at  once  to  cry 
out  against  it. 

One  of  these  is  Arthur  Cleveland  Coxe,  Protestant 
Episcopal  Bishop  of  Western  New  York.  In  the  winter  of 
1893-'9-i  Bishop  Coxe  addressed  to  Satolli  a  series  of  "  Open 


BISHOP  COXE   TO  SATOLLI.  855 

Letters "  which  were  published  widely  in  the  papers,  in 
which  he  told  some  wholesome  truths  and  stated  some  im- 
portant facts,  as  well  as  forcibly  described  Rome's  attitude 
toward  the  United  States. 

After  mentioning  some  points  from  the  past  as  between 
France  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  bishop  asks  Mr.  Satolli 
to  take  a  look  at  himself  in  the  mirror  of  these  things,  and 
proceeds  as  follows  :  — 

"After  considerable  pulse-feeling  as  to  the  admission  of  a  nuncio 
at  Washington  ;  after  strong  denials  of  any  such  idea  ;  after  evasions 
and  experiments  and  contradictions  by  the  press  ;  after  your  preliminary 
visit  to  this  country  and  your  exulting  report  abroad,  that  persons  of 
your  quality  are  here  received  and  treated  'like  sovereign  princes,'  you 
arrived  here  last  year  just  before  our  great  presidential  crisis  and  were 
received,  indeed,  'like  sovereign  princes.'  The  politicians  managed  to 
get  up  a  reception  for  you  in  a  national  vessel.  You  were  landed  in 
New  York  like  another  La  Fayetle.  Monetary  objections  were  removed 
by  explanations  that  'it  was  only  as  a  visitor  to  the  Great  Exposition  a 
Chicago '  that  such  a  reception  was  tendered  to  you.  Of  course  ;  no 
doubt !  Who  can  imagine  any  other  motive  !  But,  all  the  same,  you 
have  ever  since  posed  not  as  a  visitor  to  Chicago,  but  as  a  sovereign  prince 
and  a  general  meddler  with  affairs  everywhere  and  chiefly  among  Jesuits 
at  the  national  capital. 

"But  even  had  you  confined  your  attention  to  their  immediate  con- 
cerns, you  could  not  but  entangle  them  more  and  more,  and  make 
affairs  worse  and  worse,,  with  respect  to  their  relations  with  their  coun- 
trymen. Your  interposition  is  a  wedge,  which,  if  it  has  divided  them 
into  factions,  is  not  less  likely  to  split  our  entire  population  into  embit- 
tered and  hostile  camps,  endangering  a  social  war.  Your  apologists 
assert  your  great  friendship  for  everything  in  America,  and  your  disposi- 
tion to  settle  everything  in  our  behalf,  so  as  to  prevent  future  disturb- 
ances. As  to  the  future,  I  am  not  so  sanguine,  especially  when  I  observe 
that  even  your  concessions  are  pro  tempore.  They  are  a  temporary  sop 
to  the  American  Constitution  and  dust  for  the  eyes  of  dotards.  The 
Cahensly  doctrine  is  reserved  for  a  time  when  things  shall  be  right  for  its 
enforcement.  The  '  Syllabus '  settles  that.  The  Roman  court  consents  never 
to  enforce  its  dogmas  by  persecution  —  where  it  is  not  strong  enough. 

" Hildebrand  himself  was  equally  pacific  in  such  cases.  'But  see,' 
cry  the  newspapers,  '  how  liberal  the  modern  papacy  has  become.'  Just 
so  !  It  will  not  put  us  into  the  Inquisition  —  till  we  are  first  drugged 
and  then  chained. 


856  WHA  T  811  A LL  BE  THE  R ES UL  T8  ? 

"The  aggressions  of  the  Roman  court  upon  the  liberties  of  nations 
have  always  been  begun  by  this  sort  of  liberality.  '  Concede  that  you 
may  exact.'  Such  is  the  inveterate  maxim  of  the  pontiffs.  Concessions 
once  accepted  with  thanks,  tJie  principle  of  intervention  becomes  an  estab- 
lished fact.  It  grows  and  becomes  a  nuisance.  Then  it  is  too  late.  The 
people  remonstrate  ;  they  try  to  break  loose,  but  no,  as  in  ^Esop's  fable, 
the  horse  has  called  in  a  rider  to  revenge  him  on  other  beasts.  The  plan 
succeeds,  and  now  with  expressions  of  obligation,  the  rider  is  requested 
to  dismount.  But  not  so.  He  is  firm  in  his  saddle  ;  and  has  a  bridle  in 
the  horse's  jaws;  and  has  spurs  and  a  whip  besides.  The  'ablegate' 
is  a  fixture  in  his  seat,  and  let  the  horse  throw  him  if  he  can." 

This  is  as  complete  a  statement  as  could  be  made,  of  the 
plans  and  the  situation  of  Rome  with  respect  to  the  United 
States  government  to-day.  And  the  statement  is  complete 
even  to  the  full  meaning  of  the  fable  cited.  In  fact,  it  is 
the  citation  of  the  fable,  especially  by  Bishop  Coxe,  which 
gives  point  to  the  whole  statement.  It  is  true  that  Rome,  in 
her  "  ablegate,"  is  a  fixture  in  the  American  saddle,  with 
the  Romish  bridle  in  the  horse's  mouth,  and  spurs  and  a 
whip  besides.  And  it  is  equally  true  that  Arthur  Cleve- 
land Coxe,  Protestant  Episcopal  Bishop  of  Western  New 
York,  helped  to  put  the  American  horse  in  this  place  under 
the  Romish  rider.  Bishop  Coxe  took  a  part  in  calling  in  this 
papal  rider  for  the  American  horse  to  revenge  him  on  other 
beasts.  And  now  the  bishop  asks  the  rider  to  "  dismount." 
But  no,  "  the  ablegate  is  a  fixture  in  his  seat,  and  let  the 
horse  throw  him  if  he  can." 

Let  us  have  the  evidence  on  this  point.  The  United 
States  government  was  established,  with  the  total  separation 
of  religion  and  the  State.  It  was  one  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  government  that  it  should  never  recognize 
any  religion  in  any  way,  and  never  by  any  governmental  act 
have  anything  to  do  with  any  religion,  and  specifically  the 
Christian  religion.  And  this  government  was  established 
upon  this  principle  for  the  definitely  expressed  purpose  that 
the  American  people  should  not  be  led  back  to  the  Church 
of  Rome,  that  the  American  people  might  be  kept  forever 


A   PERTINENT  FABLE.  857 

free  from  the  domination  of  Rome  and  of  popery.  This 
was  the  perfect  freedom  and  the  glory  of  the  American 
governmental  horse. 

But  for  years  there  has  been  a  powerful  combination 
which  has  endeavored  to  persuade  this  perfectly  free  and 
powerful  horse  that  he  needed  a  religious  rider,  so  that  he 
might  properly  be  revenged  on  certain  other  "atheistic" 
and  "godless"  beasts,  and  chiefly  that  particular  beast 
called  "  Sabbath-breaking."  To  make  their  persuasions  more 
forcible,  this  combination  called  to  its  aid  the  Catholic 
Church.  This  being  precisely  what  Rome  wanted  most  of 
all,  she  gladly  accepted  the  call,  and  prepared  to  mount  as 
soon  as  the  horse  should  be  persuaded  by  the  other  parties 
to  accept  the  proffered  rider.  By  diligence  and  persistent 
effort,  and  at  last  under  threats, 'the  horse  was  "  persuaded  " 
to  accept  the  proffered  religious  rider,  in  order  that,  at  the 
World's  Fair  especially,  and  for  all  time  to  come,  he  might 
be  revenged  upon  all  "  urigodly  and  Sabbath-breaking" 
beasts.  The  horse  being  thus  "  persuaded  "  to  accept  the 
proffered  religious  rider,  allowed  himself  to  be  saddled  and 
bridled,  and  placed  in  position  for  the  rider  to  mount.  The 
"Protestant"  would-be  rider  is  just  placing  his  foot  in  the 
stirrup  to  seat  himself  upon  the  horse,  when,  lo  !  Rome,  in 
the  person  of  Satolli,  at  a  single  bound  vaults  into  the  saddle, 
seizes  the  reins,  braces  herself  in  the  stirrups,  and  rides 
boldly.  See  Rev.  xvii,  3. 

And  anybody  who  will  take  the  time  to  turn  to  the  Con- 
gressional Record  of  July  12,  1892,  pp.  6700-6701,  will  find 
the  evidence  that  Bishop  Coxe  was  one  of  the  persons  who,  in 
company  with  Catholic  ecclesiastics,  had  a  part  in  the  per- 
suading of  this  horse  to  accept  a  religious  rider,  and  in  sad- 
dling and  bridling  him  for  the  rider.  There,  in  the  last 
three  inches  on  page  6700  will  be  seen  the  words  of  Arch- 
bishops Ireland,  Gross,  and  Riordan  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
calling  for  this  arrangement.  And  in  the  first  three  or  four 
inches  on  page  6701  will  be  found  the  names  of  the  bishops 


858  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  who  called  for  the  same 
thing.  And  the  name  of  Bishop  Coxe,  of  Western  New 
York,  is  named  among  them.  All  are  presented  by  United 
States  Senator  Joseph  K.  Hawley,  of  Connecticut,  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"Archbishop  Ireland  (Roman  Catholic),  known  to  everybody  for 
eminent  general  sense  in  statesmanlike  as  well  as  ecclesiastic  affairs, 

says  :  — 

"  '  I  beg  leave  to  say  that  I  maintain  very  decided  opinions  as  regards 
the  opening  of  the  World's  Fair  on  Sunday.  I  .believe  the  doors  should 
be  closed  the  entire  day.  The  Sunday,  the  sacred  symbol  of  our  Chris- 
tianity, the  honor  of  our  civil  institutions,  is  already  too  seriously 
attacked,  whether  from  greed  of  capital  or  the  aggressiveness  of  irre- 
ligion.  To  yield,  even  in  a  lesser  degree,  to  its  adversaries  during 
solemn  national  occurrences  is  putting  the  seal  of  public  national  ap- 
proval upon  the  war  that  is  waged  against  it.  Among  other  considera- 
tions I  have  in  my  mind  the  interests  of  labor/  The  Sunday  is  the  one 
oasis  for  the  working  man  along  life's  toilsome  journey.' 

"Archbishop  Gross  (Roman  Catholic),  of  Oregon,  says  :  — 

'"In  my  humble  opinion  the  keeping  open  of  the  gates  of  the 
National  Columbian  Exposition  on  a  Sunday  would  do  very  much  to 
promote  this  deplorable  profanation  of  the  Lord's  day  in  our  country.' 

"Most  Rev.  P.  W.  Riordan,  Catholic  archbishop  of  San  Francisco, 


"  'There  should  be  no  question  as  to  the  advisability  of  opening  the 
doors  of  the  National  Exposition  on  Sunday.  The  public  sentiment,  I 
am  convinced,  is  not  in  favor  of  it.  The  time  is  come  when  all  who  are 
interested  in  public  morality  and  religion  should  strive  for  a  better  ob- 
servance of  the  Sunday  than  now  exists.  The  observance  of  the  Sunday 
is  interwoven  with  our  national  life,  social  customs,  and  religious  con- 
duct, and  they  should  not  be  outraged  by  any  act  or  declaration  of  the 
government  or  of  the  directors  who  have  charge  of  the  National  Ex- 
position.' 

"The  Right  Rev.  J.  Williams,  bishop  of  Connecticut,  of  the  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  Church,  says  :  — 

"  'My  convictions  as  to  opening  the  National  Exposition  at  Chicago 
on  Sunday  can  be  stated  in  a  very  few  words.  I  should  regard  the 
opening  as  a  shameful  violation  of  the  law  of  God,  and  therefore  an 
equally  shameful  outrage  on  the  community.' 

"  Right  Rev.  T.  M.  Clark,  bishop  of  Rhode  Island,  holds  broad  and 
liberal  views,  but  expresses  himself  vigorously  in  the  same  direction. 
"Right  Rev.  H.  B.  Whipple,  bishop  of  Minnesota,  says  :  — 


SHE    WILL  NOT  DISMOUNT.  85(J 

"'To  no  one  institution  do  we  owe  more  than  to  the  Lord's  day. 
Its  loss  has  proved  perilous  to  individuals  and  communities.  Wherever 
it  has  been  honored  as  a  day  of  rest  and  worship,  it  has  brought  untold 
blessings.  I  trust  that  we  shall  show  those  who  visit  us  that  we  do 
reverence  the  laws  of  our  heavenly  Father,  whose  providence  has  placed 
us  in  the  forefront  of  the  nations,  and  that  the  Exposition  will  not  be 
opened  on  the  Lord's  day.' 

"BISHOP  COXE,  OF  WESTERN  NEW  YORK;  Bishop  Whittle, 
of  Virginia  ;  Bishop  Tuttle,  of  Missouri  ;  Bishop  Huntingtou,  of  Central 
.New  York  ;  Bishop  Howe,  of  Pennsylvania  ;  Bishop  Lyman,  of  North 
Carolina  (all  these  are  Protestant  Episcopal  bishops)  ;  Bishop  Spalding, 
of  Colorado  ;  Bishop  Scarborough,  of  New  Jersey  ;  Bishop  Gillespie,  of 
Western  Michigan  ;  Bishop  Starkey,  of  Newark  ;  Bishop  Paddock  of 
Washington ;  Rev.  Dr.  Paret,  bishop  of  Maryland,  speak  only  one 
voice."  9 

And  now,  when  the  bishop,  with  the  others,  sees  Rome, 
in  the  person  of  Satolli,  instead  of'  themselves,  firmly  seated 
in  the  saddle  and  riding  so  boldly,  he  wildly  calls  upon  her 
to  "dismount."  And  by  the  very  force  of  the  situation, 
Bishop  Coxe  himself  is  compelled  to  answer  his  own  call  to 
dismount:  "  But  not  so.  He  is  firm  in  his  saddle;  has  a 
bridle  in  the  horse's  jaws,  and  has  spurs  and  and  a  whip  be- 
sides. The  '  ablegate '  is  a  fixture  in  his  seat,  and  let  the 
horse  throw  him  if  he  can."  Under  the  circumstances, 
Bishop  Coxe,  and  every  other  "  Protestant  "  who  had  any 
part  in  this  awful  transaction,  should  hide  his  head  for  very 
shame,  and  forever  blush  to  lift  up  his  face  in  the  presence 
of  the  American  people. 

But  the  bishop  has  more  to  say,  and  he  says  it  to  the 
following  effect :  — 

"But  I  have  more  to  say.  For  you  have  not  confined  yourself  to 
matters  of  education  only.  You  have  come  to  establish  an  Imperium  in 
imperio:  a  permanent  vice-royalty  under  the  eaves  of  our  Capitol.  The 
president  of  the  United  States  is  a  citizen  who  comes  and  goes.  His 


9  All  the  bishops  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  both  North  and  South, 
were  also  named  by  Senator  Hawley;  and  the  memorial  of  the  General  Confer- 
ence of  the  M.  E.  Church  then  in  session  at  Omaha,  calling  for  this,  was  pre- 
sented by  him  and  was  printed  in  his  speech. 


860  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

official  residence  is  no  '  mansion'  or  abiding  place.  He  is  its  guest  who 
tarries  but  a  night.  The  vice-president  has  no  official  house  in  Wash- 
ington. Our  chief-justice  has  none.  But  your  visit  to  Buffalo  was 
prompted  (so  it  was  announced)  by  your  gratitude  to  one  of  our  worthy 
citizens,  who  had  undertaken  to  provide  a  permanent  habitation  at  our 
Capitol  for  the  vice-pope.  Thus,  the  one  irremovable  potentate  at  Washing- 
ton is  the  Roman  pontiff,  represented  by  his  other  self.  Queen  Victoria, 
by  her  viceroy,  reigns  in  India  as  empress  ;  and  JiencefortJi  Leo  XIII and 
his  successors  will  enjoy  their  supremacy  on  the  Potomac  far  more  absolutely 
than  it  can  be  exercised  on  the  Tiber.  The  servile  and  illiterate  Italians, 
Polacks,  Hungarians,  and  such  like,  are  educated  only  so  far  as  the  ox 
that  knoweth  his  owner,  and  they  will  furnish  votes  by  thousands  to  any 
purchaser  who  contracts  with  the  vice-pope  for  the  supply.  All  has 
been  fore-arranged,  like  the  lines  at  Torres  Vedras.  The  Jesuits  are 
there  —  in  their  arsenal,  'The  University.'  The  lobby  is  organized  and 
sacks  the  treasury.10  Now,  you  come  as  generalissimo.  Truly,  'in vain 
the  net  is  spread  in  the  sight  of  any  bird,'  but  the  American  eagle  has 
been  drugged.  He  is  fast  asleep. 

"  '  Quenched  in  dark  clouds  of  slumber  lie 

The  terror  of  his  beak,  the  lightning  of  his  eye.'" 

"But  I  mean  to  wake  him  up.     That  is  my  humble  task." 

Very  good,  Bishop,11  but  can  you  wake  him  up?  And, 
especially,  can  you  wake  him  up,  since  you  yourself  were 
instrumental  in  drugging  him  to  his  undoing  ?  Since  your 
voice  was  heard,  with  the  others,  in  luring  him  off  his  guard 
that  he  might  be  drugged  to  helplessness  and  final  death, 
that  same  voice  can  never  wake  him  up.  Mr.  Coxe,  your 
effort  comes  too  late.  And  even  though  you  should  wake 
him  up,  what  good  can  it  do?  What  will  Satolli  'care? 
What  will  Rome  care  ?  Delilah  waked  up  Samson  after  she 
had  shorn  him  of  his  strength  and  betrayed  him  to  the  Phi- 
listines. But  what  did  the  Philistines  care  ?  —  Nay,  they 


10  The  Catholic  Church  draws  nearly  $400,000   annually  from  the  United 
States  treasury  to  be  used  in  her  own  church  work  among  the  Indians.      Several 
attempts  have  been  made  to  stop  it;  but  President  Harrison's  administration  was 
compelled  to  confess  in  the  Senate  that  it  was  "  impossible  to  do  that." 

11  For  the  occasion,  I  may  be  pardoned  in  adopting  toward  Bishop  Coxe  his 
own  style  toward  Satolli. 


THE  NATIONAL  REFORMERS'   INQUIRY.  861 

were  rather  glad  to  have  him  awakened,  that  he  might  know 
how  entirely  he  was  in  their  power,  and  how  completely  he 
was  enslaved. 

You,  Bishop  Coxe,  with  others,  have  played  the  part  of 
Delilah  to  this  American  Samson,  in  robbing  him  of  the 
secret  of  his  strength  and  betraying  him  to  these  Romish 
Philistines.  And  now,  like  Delilah,  too,  you  "mean  to 
wake  him  up."  Suppose  you  do,  what  will  these  Philistines 
care  ?  They,  too,  will  be  glad  to  have  you  do  it,  that  this 
aforetime  noble  Sampson  may  the  more  certainly  know  how 
completely  he  is  shorn  of  his  strength,  how  entirely  he  is  in 
their  power,  and  how,  blinded  and*  harnessed,  he  shall  be 
required,  slavishly  to  tread  in  the  mill  of  Rome's  evil  pur- 
poses concerning  the  world. 

Another  of  these  prominent  ones  who  has  awaked  some- 
what to  the  situation,  has  stated  the  case  in  such  a  way  that 
this  history  would  be  incomplete  without  reproducing  it. 
In  this  instance  it  is  not  merely  one  of  the  prominent  ones, 
but  the  most  prominent  one  who  was  engaged  in  the  work  of 
the  National-Reform-American-Sabbath-Union  combination 
—  it  is  indeed  none  other  than  "Rev."  Wilbur  F.  Crafts, 
writing  as  editor  of  the  Christian  Statesman,  and  this  paper 
as  from  the  beginning  the  official  organ  of  the  whole  religio- 
political  combination  ! 

Writing  editorially  in  the  Christian  Statesman  of  October 
28,  1893,  and  with  direct  reference  to  Satolli  and  the 
Catholic  Church  in  the  United  States,  Mi1.  Crafts  raised,  for 
him  especially,  the  altogether  pertinent  inquiry,  "Are  we 
cherishing  a  viper  ?  " 

And  in  this  and  another  editorial  in  the  Statesman  of 
December  9,  1893,  he  proceeds  at  considerable  length  ,to 
answer  his  own  query,  and  in  a  way  too  that  is  extremely 
interesting  in  view  of  the  record  that  Mr.  Crafts  himself  with 
the  other  National  Reformers  made  for  years  in  seeking, 
and  at  last  forming,  an  alliance  with  the  papacy  in  the  United 
States. 


862  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

Everything  lie  says  of  the  papacy  is  true  enough,  but 
when  his  knowledge  of  the  papacy  which  is  thus  set  forth  so 
clearly,  is  set  alongside  of  his  own  actions  in  forming  alli- 
ances with  the  papacy,  it  fairly  places  him  and  the  National 
Reform  Combination  in  an  attitude  as  iniquitous  and  as 
treacherous  as  the  very  papacy  itself.  The  first  sentence  of 
Mr.  Crafts's  and  the  Christian  Statesman's  answer  to  the 
question,  "  Are  we  cherishing  a  viper?  "  is  this  :  - 

"The  most  powerful  enemy  civil  liberty  has  ever  contended  against 
is  the  papacy." 

True  enough,  Mr.  Drafts,12  and  yet,  knowing  this,  you 
formed  an  organized  alliance  with  this  ' '  most  powerful  organ- 
ized enemy  of  civil  liberty"  instead  of  contending  against  it. 
On  a  pretense  of  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  you  yourself 
took  the  lead  in  forming  an  organized  alliance  with  this, 
as  you  know,  "most  powerful  organized  enemy  of  civil 
liberty. "  13  And  you  did  it  that  you  might  present  before 
Congress  a  united  front  in  your  united  demand  that  the 
national  government  of  the  United  States  should  put  itself 
ia  the  position  of  the  protector  and  defender  of  the  "Chris- 
tian religion  "  and  its  institutions,  but  chiefly  the  Catholic 
Sunday,  "  the  American  Sabbath."  You  succeeded.  And 
having  thus  "shaped  legislation  on  the  principles  of  the  true 
church,"  she  now,  in  the  person  of  Satolli,  steps  in  and 
takes  the  superintendency  of  the  cause  for  the  future.  And 
now  after  all  this,  you,  of  all  men,  you  raise  the  query, 
' '  Are  we  cherishing  a  viper  ?  "  Yes,  of  course  you  are  ; 


12  As  in  a  portion  of  his  article  Mr.  Crafts  addresses  the  Catholics  in  the 
second  person,  I  adopt  the  same  form  in  noticing  his  statements.     This  course  is 
not  pursued  on  account  of  any  personal  grievance  against  Mr.  Crafts,  for  I  am 
not  conscious  of  a  shadow  of  such  feeliug.     But  his   relation  to  the  articles 
noted,  and  to  the  whole  cause  with  which  we  are  dealing,  not  only  justifies  this 
mode  of  address,  but  renders  a  personal  style  essential  to  an  appreciation  of  the 
peculiar  circumstances.     This  style  is  not  in  any  sense  a  personal  attack.     Mr. 
Crafts  is  named  only  as  the  chief  representative  and  embodiment  of  the  combination. 

13  Pages  730-735. 


"A   MENACE    TO   LIBERTY."  863 

and  you  were  doing  that  in  1888  and  1889  in  your  "corre- 
spondence and  conference"  with  Cardinal  Gibbons  and  the 
Catholic  Congress,  to  secure  an  alliance  with  it  to  influence 
the  United  States  Congress  to  enter  upon  a  course  of  relig- 
ious legislation.  Of  course  you  are,  and  all  these  years  you 
have  been,  cherishing  a  viper.  And  by  your  cherishing,  the 
viper  has  been  warmed  back  into  active  life,  and  now  begins 
to  sting  to  death  both  yourselves  and  the  republic  ;  and  now 
undo  your  work  and  get  rid  of  him  if  you  can. 

The  second  sentence  of  this  editorial  runs  thus  :  — 

"For  over  a  thousand  years  there  has  not  been  an  hour  when  this 
ecclesiastical  organization  was  not  a  menace  to  the  political  liberties  of 
the  civilized  world." 

This  is  perfectly  true,  Mr  Crafts.  And  this  being  so, 
what  was  this  ecclesiastical  organization  in  that  hour, 
December  1,  1888,  when  you  wrote  with  your  own  hand 
that  request  to  Cardinal  Gibbons,  the  then  head  of  this 
ecclesiastical-  organization  in  the  United  States,  asking  him 
to  give  you  and  your  fellows  his  name  and  support  in 
your  demand  upon  Congress  for  a  national  law  in  behalf  of 
religion  ? 

This  being  true,  what  was  this  "ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion "  in  that  hour,  December  4,  1888,  when  Cardinal 
Gibbons  sent  his  response  to  your  letter,  expressing  himself 
as  "most  happy  "  to  join  you  in  your  "laudable "  work ? 

This  being  true,  what  was  that  "ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion "  in  that  hour,  December,  13,  1888,  when  you  stood 
before  the  Blair  committee  of  the  United  States  Senate,  in 
that  magnificent  Senate  hall,  and  witli  your  own  hand,  and 
in  your  own  words,  presented  not  only  the  cardinal's  letter, 
but  with  it,  and  on  the  strength  of  it,  presented  the  whole 
solid  body  of  this  "ecclesiastical  organization"  (7,200,000) 
in  the  United  States,  as  being  one  with  you  in  your  efforts 
to  have  the  government  of  the  United  States  committed  to 
the  guardianship  of  religion  ?  According  to  your  own 

63 


804  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS f 

words,  this  ecclesiastical  organization  was  in  that  hour  "a 
menace  to  the  political  liberties  of  the  civilized  world,"  and 
therefore  a  menace  to  the  political  liberties  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  and  you  knew  it.  Then  what 
were  you  yourself  in  that  hour,  as  you  stood  there  as  the 
representative  of  the  National  Reform  combination  ?  — what 
were  you  and  your  combination,  in  your  efforts  there,  in 
that  hour,  —  but,  equally  with  this  other  ecclesiastical  organ- 
ization, and  through  it,  "a  menace  to  the  political"  and 
religious  "  liberties  "  of  the  American  people  and  "  the  civi- 
lized world  "  ? 

You  know  that  in  that  same  hour,  I  stood  before  that 
same  Senate  committee  to  oppose  you  and  your  combi- 
nation, including  this  other  "ecclesiastical  organization," 
because  you  and  it,  and  it  through  you,  at  that  hour,  were 
a  menace  to  the  political  and  religious  liberties  of  the 
American  people  and  of  the  civilized  world.  You  stood 
there  to  help  forward  this  wicked  thing  in  its  menacing 
purpose  toward  the  political  and  religious  liberties  of  the 
civilized  world.  I  stood  there  uncompromisingly  to  oppose 
it.  Which  was  in  the  right?  You  stood  there  cherishing 
that  "viper."  I  stood  there  to  keep  the  thing  forever 
chilled  at  the  very  least  in  dormancy  so  far  as  our  be- 
loved land  is  concerned,  by  maintaining  the  principles 
established  by  our  governmental  Fathers  for  this  very  pur- 
pose. If  you  and  your  combination  had  been  doing  all 
the  time  what  I  was  doing,  that  hour,  and  what  the  Sev- 
enth-day Adventists  have  been  doing  all  the  time,  would 
you  be  now  raising  the  all-important  query,  "  Are  we  cher- 
ishing a  viper  ?  "  Would  you  ? 

The  editor  goes  on  in  answering  his  question  concerning 
that  viper,  at  the  following  rate  :  — 

"She  has  organized  and  consummated  conspiracies  which  have  hor- 
rified all  after  ages,  in  her  efforts  to  secure  universal  supremacy  over 
mankind.  .  .  .  There  is  not  an  offense  against  human  rights  and  liberties 
but  may  justly  be  charged  against  the  papacy.  Then  there  is  the  fact 


"HALF-HEATHENISH  CHRISTIANITY."  865 

that  both  ignorance  and  superstition  result  from  her  supremacy.  .  .  . 
By  her  half-heathenish  system  of  Christianity  she  has  held  the  millions 
under  her  authority  in  the  greatest  darkness,  mental  and  spiritual.  .  .  . 
There  is  absolutely  no  excuse  for  the  degraded  condition  of  the  masses 
in  papal  lands,  both  on  this  continent  and  in  Europe  ;  and  the  only 
reason  for  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  ecclesiastical  system  which  has  en- 
thralled them,  mind  and  soul.  The  papacy  has  not  changed.  She  can- 
not change.  The  fundamental  doctrines  of  her  system  forbid  it.  She 
is  so  constructed  that  she  must  insist  on  absolute  supremacy  over  men 
and  nations." 

This  is  all  perfectly  true.  And  yet,  Mr.  Crafts,  you  and 
your  National  Reform  combination  for  years  sought  and 
finally  obtained  a  close  alliance  with  this  "half-heathenish 
system  of  Christianity,"  for  wholly  heathenish  purposes  —  for 
religio-political  purposes.  And  her  principle  of  absolutism, 
which  is  the  very  life  of  that  ecclesiastical  system,  you  your- 
self persistently  sanctioned  in  your  crowding  all  the  Catholics 
of  the  country  into  the  support  of  your  schemes  because  the 
cardinal  had  approved  it.  And  you  not  only  thus  sanc- 
tioned that  principle,  but  you  confirmed  it  in  words,  when 
you  wrote  and  printed  this  :  — 

"The  [cardinal's]  letter  is  n<^;  equal  in  value  to  the  individual 
signatures  of  the  millions  he  represents  ;  but  no  loyal  Catholic  priest  or 
bishop  or  person  will  oppose  what  has  been  thus  indorsed."14 

O,  knowing  all  this  which  you  have  said,  and  yet 
doing  all  this  which  you  have  done,  it  is  perfectly  evident 
that  the  "  Christianity  "  which  you  and  the  National  Reform 
combination  represent,  is  in  every  principle  as  certainly  half- 
heathenish  as  is  the  papacy  itself. 

Further  we  quote  :  — 

"The  retirement  of  Mr.  Terence  V.  Powderly  from  the  head  of  that 
great  organization,  "  The  Knights  of  Labor,"  has  called  forth  a  great  deal 
of  newspaper  comment.  There  is  one  thing  that  has  impressed  us  for 
years  that  seems  not  to  have  been  noticed  in  this  connection.  Mr. 
Powderly  is  a  Roman  Catholic.  Those  who  watched  the  growth  and 


u  Senate,  Mis.  Doc.  No.  43,  Fiftieth  Congress,  2nd  Session,  p.  18,  Note. 


866  WHAT  SHALL  BE  THE  RESULTS? 

development  of  the  organization  have  not  forgotten  how  diligently  the 
cardinal  and  the  bishops  of  '  the  church '  courted  it.  '  The  great  mas- 
ter' did  not  seem  adverse,  either,  to  the  advances  made  by  these  digni- 
taries. The  blessing  of  the  pope  or  the  presence  of  a  cardinal  was  an 
event  in  the  annual  meeting.  It  looked  at  one  time  as  though  '  the 
church'  had  captured  the  organization  and  might  proceed  to  arm  and 
drill  it  as  she  is  doing  with  so  many  of  her  '  benevolent'  associations." 

And  yet  being  "impressed"  with  all  this  "for  years," 
you  yourself,  Mr.  Crafts,  spent  some  of  those  very  years  in 
drawing  into  alliance  with  your  religio-political  combination, 
Mr.  Powderly  and  the  organization  of  which  he  was  the 
head.15  Knowing  that  Mr.  Powderly  was  a  Catholic,  that 
the  organization  of  which  he  was  the  head  was  largely 
Catholic,  that  it  was  diligently  courted  by  the  cardinal  and 
the  bishops  of  "the  church,"  and  that  Mr.  Powderly  was  not 
only  ' '  not  adverse  "  to  this  courtship,  but  that  he  was  in 
direct  and  official  connection  with  the  cardinal, —  knowing 
all  this  'for  years,' you  yourself  spent  years  in  diligently 
courting  this  organization.  So  diligently  did  you  do  this 
that  you  actually  went  so  far  as  to  make  a  proposal  of  mar- 
riage, by  declaring  that  you  had  "  almost  decided  to  become 
a  Knight  of  Labor"  yourse^,  as  in  1889  you  made  "a 
proposal  of  courtship"  to  the  papacy  itself  direct,  in  that 
"correspondence  and  conference  "  connected  with  the  Balti- 
more Congress. 

Again  this  editorial  says  :  — 

"For  some  reason,  the  world  is  not  ready  to  accept  the  explanation 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  puts  on  her  own  actions.  It  may  be  a  great 


15  He  became  so  enthusiastic  in  the  matter  that  at  the  General  Assembly  of 
the  Knights  of  Labor  at  Indianapolis  in  November,  1888,  he  expressed  himself 
in  this  fashion  :  — 

"  Having  carefully  read  and  reread  your  declaration  of  principles,  and  your 
•constitution,'  and  having  watched  with  interest  the  brave  yet  conservative 
shots  of  your  Powderly  at  intemperance  and  other  great  evils,  I  have  found  my- 
self so  closely  in  accord  with  you  that  I  have  almost  decided  to  become  a  Knight 
of  Labor  myself.  If  I  do  not,  it  will  be  only  because  I  believe  I  can  advance 
your  principles  better  as  an  outside  ally."  — Journal  of  United  Labor,  November 
29,  1888.  (This  effort  was  continued  through  1889  and  later.) 


ARE    THEY  SUSPICIOUS?  867 

injustice,  but  it  is  a  fact  that  the  declarations  made  by  its  popes  and 
cardinals  for  the  last  few  hundred  years  are  taken  at  a  great  discount." 

But,  Mr.  Crafts,  you  did  not  make  any  such  discount. 
You  yourself  received  a  declaration  from  Cardinal  Gibbons 
that  he  was  "most  happy"  to  add  his  name  to  yours  and 
others  in  your  "laudable"  enterprise.  And  instead  of  tak- 
ing it  " at  a  great  discount"  or  any  discount  at  all,  you  took 
it  at  such  an  infinite  increase  that  whereas  the  cardinal's 
declaration  was  that  he  added  only  his  name,  you  made  his 
one  name  count  for  7,200,000  names.  There  is  not  any  very 
"great  discount"  about  that. 

Next  he  speaks  personally  to  the  papacy  thus  :  — 

"Americans  are  suspicious  of  your  church.  The  mass  of  the  people 
of  this  country  do  not  believe  you  are  to  be  trusted  with  power  of  any 
kind." 

Yes ;  Americans  are  suspicious  of  the  papal  church. 
But,  Mr.  Crafts,  neither  your  record  as  a  National  Reformer, 
nor  the  record  of  the  National  Reform  Association  from  the 
beginning,  shows  that  you  have  been  at  all  suspicions  of  that 
church.  On  the  contrary,  you  have  acted  toward  it  as  though 
it  were  the  most  trustworthy  thing  in  heaven  or  earth.  Now 
a  question:  In  view  of  this  record  of  yours,  and  of  the  whole 
National  Reform  combination,  in  principle,  in  purpose,  and  in 
action,  are  you  Americans,  or  are  you  papists?  And  if  you 
all  had  always  been  open  and  avowed  papists,  could  you 
possibly  have  done  so  much  toward  placing  the  papacy  in 
power  in  the  United  States  as  you  have  certainly  done  in  the 
guise  under  which  you  have  worked  ? 

Again  :  in  view  of  this  record  of  yours,  it  is  evident  to 
every  candid  mind  that  you,  are  not  one  of  the  people,  nor  is 
your  National  Reform  combination  a  company  of  people,  who 
"do  not  believe  that  the  papal  church  is  to  be  trusted  with 
power  of  any  kind."  On  the  contrary,  you  and  your  fellow- 
workers,  both  men  and  women,  have  spent  your  most  dili- 
gent efforts  for  years,  with  the  aid  and  alliance  of  the  papal 


868  WHA  T  SHALL  BE  THE  RESUL  TS  f 

church,  to  get  the  government  of  the  United  States  com- 
mitted to  the  support  of  religion,  and  thus  clothe  the  ecclesi- 
astical with  civil  power  here.  You  succeeded  at  last. 
And  now  you  find  the  papal  "ecclesiastical  organization," 
which  you  know  had,  for  every  hour  of  "more  than  a  thou- 
sand years,  been  a  menace  to  the  political  liberties  of  the 
civilized  world,"  —now  you  find  this  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion in  the  place  and  wielding  the  power  which  you  your- 
selves hoped  to  possess.  Thus  by  your  very  lack  of  suspicion 
of  the  papal  church,  you  have  succeeded  in  clothing  her 
with  the  greatest  power  of  the  world,  when  you  knew  all  the 
time  that  she  was  not  "to  be  trusted  with  power  of  any 
kind." 

And  finally,  from  the  editorial  of  October  28,  1893,  we 
quote  as  the  climax,  the  sum,  and  the  just  condemnation 
of  all  this  shameful  and  treacherous  intrigue,  the  follow- 
ing :- 

"The  government  that  cherishes  the  papacy  is  cherishing  a  viper 
that  will  some  day  sting  it  to  the  heart." 

That  is  true.  And  you,  Mr.  Crafts,  and  the  Christian 
Statesman  knew  it  all  the  time  !  And  yet  you  went  to  that 
viper,  which  had  been  flung  out  into  the  cold  by  our  govern- 
mental fathers  as  the  venomous  thing  which  it  is,  which 
they  had  flung  out  into  the  cold  to  perish, —  you  picked  it 
up,  you  took  it  to  your  bosom,  and  warmed  and  cherished 
it,  and,  through  the  success  of  your  religio-political  intrigue 
upon  the  government  of  the  United  States,  the  glory  of  the 
world,  you  brought  it  back  to  full  and  active  and  venomous 
vigor.  You  hoped  that  the  hood  which  you  thought  you  had 
slipped  over  its  head  would  remain,  and  that  you  might  thus 
use  it  ever  as  a  sort  of  pet  in  your  house  for  your  amusement 
or  service.  But  behold,  you  find  that  you  failed  really  to 
hood  the  thing  at  the  start,  and  that  now  you  carft.  You 
find  that  you  have  nourished  it  back  to  a  life  so  active  and 
vigorous  that  it  has  taken  possession  of  the  house.  And 


WHERE   THE  RESPONSIBILITY  LIES.  869 

now  ycni  raise  an  alarm  against  cherishing  a  viper !  Now 
you,  give  warning  that  whoever  cherishes  and  warms  a  viper, 
it  "will  some  day  sting"  him  to  the  heart  !  But  who  cher- 
ished this  viper  and  warmed  it  back  to  life  ?  Who  picked 
up  and  brought  into  the  house,  and  cherished  back  to  active 
and  vigorous  life,  this  viper  which  has  taken  possession  of 
the  American  house,  and  which  will  certainly  sting  the 
household  to  death  ?  —  O,  the  National  Reform  combination 
did  it.  And  the  chiefest  instrument  of  that  combination  in 
the  doing  of  it,  was  "  Rev."  Wilbur  F.  Crafts. 

And  now  in  view  of  this  dark  and- sinuous  record,  the 
present  consequences  of  it,  and  the  fearful  results  which  are 
yet  to  be  wrought  by  it,  we  can  only  in  pity,  and  in  the  sor- 
rowful tones  of  our  Saviour,  when  he  saw  such  things  going 
on  in  his  day,  exclaim  concerning  the  whole  National  Re- 
form combination  :  "Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers, 
how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell  ? " 

Such  are  the  results  so  far  of  the  efforts  of  the  grand 
combination  formed  of  the  National  Reform  Association, 
the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union,  the  Prohibi- 
tion Party,  the  American  Sabbath  Union,  the  Evangelical 
Alliance,  and  the  Young  People's  Society  of  Christian  (?) 
Endeavor,  to  get  "the  Christian  religion"  and  "the 
Christian  Sabbath  "  recognized  by  the  government  of  the 
United  States.  And  every  man  and  woman  who  favored 
the  design  of  this  combination,  or  who  sent  a  petition  to 
Congress  for  the  closing  of  the  World's  Fair  on  Sunday,  or 
for  the  governmental  recognition  of  "the  Christian  re- 
ligion," or  the  "Christian  Sabbath"  or  the  "Lord's  day," 
or  aided  the  movement  in  any  other  way,  is  responsible  for 
this  shameful  and  awful  result. 

The  one  great  result,  which  embodies  and  causes  all 
other  results,  is  that  the  government  of  the  United  States 
has  thus  been  surrendered  to  the  principle  of  lawlessness, 
and  put  in  the  power  of  the  very  "Mystery  of  Lawlessness" 
itself.  And  the  "Mystery  of  Lawlessness"  has  already  be- 


870  WHAT  SHALL  BE   THE  RESULTS' 

gun  to  enter  into  her  possession,  and  they  themselves  see 
now  what  we  told  them  all  the  time  that  they  would  see. 

As  we  have  stated  before,  for  the  average  law-breaker 
there  is  always  a  ready  remedy  in  the  regular  forms  of  gov- 
ernmental order  ;  but  for  these  supreme  law-breakers  who 
have  broken  down  the  established  safeguards  of  govern- 
mental order  itself,  where  is  the  remedy  ? 

Ah  !  there  is  a  remedy  for  this  too.  It  is  in  the  hands 
of  God,  the  Author  of  governmental  order. 

Against  all  their  attempts  to  do  this  great  evil  we  ever 
appealed  to  the  Constitution,  the  grand  charter  and  safe- 
guard of  the  rights  of  mankind,  the  embodiment  of  the 
true  principles  of  governmental  order.  And  now  that  they 
have  done  the  evil,  and  in  the  doing  of  it  have  overridden 
the  Constitution,  broken  down  this  safeguard  of  the  rights 
of  mankind,  and  smitten  the  very  citadel  of  governmental 
order — now  we  appeal  to  the  Author  of  governmental  order 
himself.  And  our  appeal  is  heard.  We  wait  in  perfect 
confidence.  The  just  judgment  will  be  rendered  in  due 
time. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 


THE  SECOND  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

WE  have  seen  Christianity  in  its  purity,  as  it  went  forth 
by  the  ministry  of  the  apostles,  triumph  over  all  the 
power  of  the  world  allied  against  it.  Through  sufferings  and 
the  cross,  we  have  seen  it  force  from  the  empire  of  Rome  a 
recognition  of  the  right  of  men  to  worship  as  they  choose 
without  interference  on  the  part  of  the  State.  We  have  seen 
hypocritical  apostate  professors  of  that  religion  secure  an  alli- 
ance between  the  State  and  their  organized  apostasy.  This  il- 
licit union  of  this  unholy  church  with  the  unholy  State,  created 
the  papacy, —  "the  man  of  sin  ;  "  "the  son  of  perdition  ; " 
"the  mystery  of  iniquity  ;  "  "  the  beast ;"  "Mystery,  Baby- 
lon the  Great,  the  Mother  of  Harlots  and  Abominations  of 
the  Earth." 

In  the  Reformation,  in  the  principles  of  genuine  Protest- 
antism, we  have  seen  Christianity  again  rise  in  purity  from 
the  filthiness  and  disgrace  into  which  it  had  been  cast. 
And  again  through  manifold  sufferings  and  the  cross,  in 
spite  of  the  perverseness  of  church  leaders  and  the  power  of 
kings,  we  have  seen  the  principles  of  Christianity  and  of 
Protestantism  triumph  before  the  world  in  the  principles  of 
the  government  of  the  United  States.  We  have  also  seen 
the  professed  representatives  of  Protestantism  in  the  United 
States  secure  an  alliance  between  the  State  and  the  com- 
bined churches.  This  is  nothing  else  than  apostasy. 

The  professed  Protestantism  of  to-day  calls  upon  Con- 
gress, and  State  legislatures,  and  the  courts,  to  decide  re- 

[871] 


872  THE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

ligious  questions  and  controversies,  and  to  enact  laws 
embodying  religious  doctrines  and  enforcing  church  dog- 
mas ;  it  prosecutes  at  the  law,  fines  and  imprisons  dissenters 
from  the  legalized  doctrines,  and  has  gone  even  so  far  as  to 
demand  of  the  national  Executive  the  mustering  of  the  regu- 
lar troops  to  enforce  upon  the  people,  at  the  point  of  the 
bayonet,  the  recognition  and  observance  of  religious  dog- 
mas and  institutions.1  Any  or  all  of  this  is  anything  but 
true  Protestantism  in  any  sense.  It  is  apostasy  only. 

At  the  second  Diet  of  Spires,  held  in  1529,  there  was 
presented  the  Protest,  which  originated,  and  gave  to  those 
who  made  it,  the  title  and  name  of  Protestants,  And  in 
summarizing  this  protest  the  historian  states  its  principles  as 
follows  :  — 

"  The  principles  contained  in  the  celebrated  Protest  of  the  19th  of 
April,  1529,  constitute  tlie  very  essence  of  Protestantism.  Now  this  Protest 
opposes  two  abuses  of  man  in  matters  of  faith  ;  the  first  is  the  intrusion 
of  the  civil  magistrate  ;  and  the  second  the  arbitrary  authority  of  the 
church.  Instead  of  these  abuses,  Protestantism  sets  the  power  of  con- 
science above  the  magistate,  and  the  authority  of  the  word  of  God  above 
the  visible  church.  In  the  first  place  it  rejects  the  civil  power  in  divine 
things,  and  says  with  the  prophets  and  apostles,  '  We  must  obey  God 
rather  than  man.'  In  the  presence  of  the  crown  of  Charles  the  Fifth,  it 
uplifts  the  crown  of  Jesus  Christ."  —  If  Aubigne* 

The  professed  Protestants  of  to-day  claim  that  Sunday  is 
the  Christian  Sabbath  ;  that  it  is  the  great  charter  of  their 
religion  ;  that  it  is,  indeed,  the  very  citadel  of  their  faith. 
Now  do  they  oppose  the  intrusion  of  the  civil  magistrate  into 
this  great  question  of  their  religion? — No,  indeed.  Every- 
body knows  that  so  far  are  they  from  opposing  any  intrusion 
of  the  civil  magistrate,  that  they  actually  require  the  civil 
authority  to  intrude  upon  the  discussion  and  decision  of  the 
question  and  the  enactment  of  laws  requiring  its  observance, 

1  This  was  done  more  than  once  —  twice  by  telegraph  even  —  in  the  month 
of  May,  1893.     See  the  record  of  some  of  this   in    Christian  Statesman  June  3, 
1893. 

2  "  History  of  the  Reformation,"  book  xiii,  chap,  vi,  p.  521. 


THE  ARBITRARY  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.     873 

and  also  require  the  courts  to  intrude  themselves  into  it 
whenever  the  law  is  called  in  question  ;  and  further,  call 
upon  the  Executive  further  to  intrude  the  civil  authority  by 
exerting  all  the  power  vested  in  him.  All  this  they  have 
done  and  are  doing  before  the  eyes  of  all  the  world. 

Now  as  it  is  the  very  essence  of  Protestantism  to  oppose 
the  intrusion  of  the  civil  magistrate  in  all  things  religious ; 
and  as  these  people,  professing  to  be  Protestants,  not  only 
do  not  oppose  it,  but  actually  require  the  whole  magisterial 
power  of  the  State  and  United  States  governments  to  intrude 
there,  it  follows  that  these  people  are  not  Protestants  at 
all,  and  that  neither  their  movement  nor  their  work  is 
Protestantism  in  any  sense.  It  is  apostasy. 

Secondly,  it  is  the  essence  of  Protestantism  to  oppose 
"the  arbitrary  authority  of  the  church." 

Now,  for  the  institution  of  Sunday  or  for  Sunday  observ- 
ance, in  any  way,  there  is  no  authority  but  the  arbitrary 
authority  of  the  church.  Professed  Protestants  not  only 
know  this,  but  they  openly  say  it.  Well,  then,  as  they  know 
that  there  is  no  command  of  God  for  Sunday  observance  ; 
and  as  the  church  power  only  is  that  which  requires  its  ob- 
servance, this  is  proof  in  itself  that  the  only  authority  for  it 
is  the  arbitrary  authority  of  the  church. 

Yet  more  than  this.  Even  though  Christ  had  com- 
manded it,  for  the  church  to  require  and  enforce  upon  men 
its  observance  by  law  —  this  would  be  nothing  else  than  to 
assert  the  arbitrary  authority  of  the  church.  Because,  Christ 
himself  has  said,  "  If  any  man  hear  my  words,  and  believe 
not,  I  judge  [condemn]  him  not."  As  therefore  Christ 
leaves  every  man  free  to  observe  his  words  or  not ;  for  the 
church  to  compel  any  man  to  do  it,  is  to  put  herself  above 
Christ,  and  do  what  lie  does  not  do.  And  this,  in  itself,  is 
only  to  assert  the  arbitrary  authority  of  the  church.  So  that 
whether  there  be  a  command  of  God  for  Sunday  observance 
or  not,  in  this  matter  the  result  is  the  same  ;  to  do  as  the 
professed  Protestant  churches  of  the  United  States  and  of 


874  THE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

the  world  have  done  and  are  doing,  in  requiring  Sunday  ob- 
servance of  all  by  law,  is  nothing  else  than  to  assert  the 
rightfulness  of  the  arbitrary  authority  of  the  church. 

But  it  is  the  essence  of  Protestantism  to  oppose  the  arbi- 
trary authority  of  the  church.  Therefore,  as  the  professed 
Protestants  not  only  do  not  oppose  it,  but  actually  assert  it 
and  openly  maintain  it,  it  unmistakably  follows  that  they 
are  not  true  Protestants  at  all,  and  that  their  position  is  not 
that  of  true  Protestantism  in  any  sense.  It  is  apostasy. 

This  proves  that  to  oppose  the  Sunday  institution  itself  ; 
to  oppose  the  Sunday  movement  in  all  its  parts  ;  to  oppose 
Sunday  laws  in  any  and  all  their  phases ;  to  oppose  and  deny 
the  right  of  congresses,  or  courts,  or  executives,  to  touch  the 
question  of  Sunday  observance,  or  any  other  religious  ques- 
tion in  any  way,  and  to  reject  entirely  the  authority  of  any 
such  action  when  it  is  asserted  —  this  and  this  only  is  Prot- 
estantism: Even  admitting  that  Sunday  were  the  Sabbath, 
those  who  observe  it  can  be  Protestants  only  by  opposing 
all  intrusion  of  the  magistrate  into  the  question  ;  by  oppos- 
ing all  attempts  of  the  church  to  require  its  recognition  or 
observance  by  law,  and  by  asserting  their  own  individual 
right  to  observe  it  as  they  choose,  without  any  dictation  or 
interference  from  anybody.  This  alone  is  Protestantism. 

"Protestantism  sets  the  power  of  conscience  above  the 
magistrate,"  even  though  the  magistrate  calls  himself  a 
Christian  and  a  Protestant,  and  proposes  to  enforce  the 
"Christian  Sabbath."  "Protestantism  sets  the  authority  of 
the  word  of  God  above  the  visible  church,"  even  though  the 
church  calls  itself  Protestant.  Protestantism  "rejects  the 
civil  power  in  divine  things,  and  says  with  the  prophets  and 
apostles  :  '  We  must  obey  God  rather  than  man,' "  and  that, 
too,  as  God  commands  it,  and  not  as  man  commands  it, 
nor  as  man  says  that  God  commands  it.  Protestantism 
opposes  and  rejects  every  human  intrusion,  whether  of  the 
magistrate  or  of  the  ecclesiastic,  between  the  soul  and  Jesus 
Christ,  and  everlastingly  maintains  the  divine  right  of  the 


THE   COUNCIL    OF    TRENT.  875 

individual  to  worship  according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own 
conscience  exercised  at  his  own  free  choice. 

True  Protestantism  insists  that  "  the  Bible  and  the  Bible 
alone,"  "the  written  word  of  God,''  "thus  saith  the  Lord,'' 
is  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  the  religion  of  Protestants.  But 
it  is  the  very  certainty  of  truth  that  there  is  no  Bible,  no  writ- 
ten word  of  God,  no  "thus  saith  the  Lord"  for  the  Sunday 
institution,  or  for  Sunday  observance,  or  for  the  intrusion  of 
Caesar —  the  civil  power — into  the  things  of  God  or  of  the 
church  ;  and  the  professed  Protestants  of  to-day  know  it,  and 
have  said  so  over  and  over. 

Indeed,  Protestantism  has  always  known  that  there  is 
no  scripture,  but  only  church  authority,  tradition  only,  for 
the  institution  of  Sunday.  It  was  exactly  here  that  the 
Council  of  Trent  drew  the  line  between  Protestantism  and 
Catholicism,  and  this,  too,  at  the  expense  of  Protestantism, 
because  of  its  inconsistency. 

The  Reformers  had  constantly  charged  that  the  Catholic 
Church  had  apostatized  from  the  truth  as  contained  in  the 
written  word.  "The  written  word,"  "  the  Bible  and  the 
Bible  only,"  "thus  saith  the  Lord,"  —these  were  their 
constant  watchwords;  and  "the  Scripture,  as  in  the  written 
word,  the  sole  standard  of  appeal,"- —this  was  the  pro- 
claimed platform  of  the  Reformation  and  of  Protestantism. 
"The  Scripture  and  tradition,"  "the  Bible  as  interpreted 
by  the  church  and  according  to  the  unanimous  consent  of 
the  Fathers," — this  was  the  position  and  claim  of  the  Catholic 
Church. 

This  was  the  main  issue  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  which 
was  called  especially  to  consider  the  questions  that  had  been 
raised  and  forced  upon  the  attention  of  Europe  by  the  Re- 
formers. The  very  first  question  concerning  faith  that  was 
considered  by  the  council  was  the  question  involved  in  this 
issue.  There  was  a  strong  party,  even  of  the  Catholics, 
within  the  council,  who  were  in  favor  of  abandoning  tradi- 
tion and  adopting  the  Scripture  only,  as  the  standard  of 


8  70  THE  SECOND   GREAT  APOSTASY. 

• 

authority.  This  view  was  so  decidedly  held  in  the  debates 
in  the  council,  that  the  pope's  legates  actually  wrote  to  him 
that  there  was  "a  strong  tendency  to  set  aside  tradition  alto- 
gether, and  to  make  Scripture  the  sole  standard  of  appeal." 

But  to  do  this  would  manifestly  be  to  go  a  long  way  to- 
ward justifying  the  claims  of  the  Protestants.  By  this  crisis 
there  was  devolved  upon  the  ultra-Catholic  portion  of  the 
council  the  task  of  convincing  the  others  that  "Scripture  and 
tradition"  was  the  only  sure  ground  to  stand  upon.  If  this 
could  be  done,  the  council  could  be  carried  to  issue  a  decree 
condemning  the  Keformation,  otherwise  not. 

A  vote  was  secured,  and  April  8,  1546,  the  council  passed 
"two  decrees,  the  first  of  which  enacts,  under  anathema,  that 
Scripture  and  tradition  are  to  be  received  and  venerated 
equally,  and  that  the  deutero-canonical  (the  apocryphal) 
books  are  part  of  the  canon  of  Scripture.  The  second  de- 
cree declares  the  Vulgate  to  be  the  sole  authentic  and  stand- 
ard Latin  version,  and  gives  it  such  authority  as  to  supersede 
the  original  texts  ;  forbids  the  interpretation  of  Scripture 
contrary  to  the  sense  received  by  the  church,  '  or  even  con- 
trary to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,' "  etc.3 

Yet  for  all  this  the  question  was  not  settled.  It  kept 
constantly  recurring  in  the  council ;  many  of  those  who  had 
voted  for  the  decree  were  very  uneasy  about  it.  On  this 
point  the  Catholic  writer,  Dr.  H.  J.  Holtzman,  gives  the 
following  account :  — 

"  The  '  council  was  unanimously  of  the  opinion  of  Ambrosius 
Pelargus,  that  at  no  price  should  any  triumph  be  prepared  for  the  Prot- 
estants to  be  able  to  say  that  the  council  had  condemned  the  old  church. 
But  this  practice  caused  endless  trouble,  without  ever  giving  good  se- 
curity. Indeed,  it  required  for  this  crisis  that  almost  divine  sagacity 
which  the  Spanish  legate  attributed  to  the  synod  on  March  15,  1562. 

"Finally,  at  the  opening  of  the  last  session,  January  18,  1562,  all 
scruples  were  cast  aside.  The  archbishop  of  Rheggio  made  a  speech, 
in  which  he  openly  declared  that  tradition  stood  higher  than  the  Bible. 

3 See  the  proceedings  of  the  Council,  Augsburg  Confession,  and  "Encyclo- 
pedia Britannica,"  article,  "Trent,  Council  of." 


"TRADITION  SIGNIFIES  CONTINUING  INSPIRATION:'     877 

For  this  reason  alone  the  authority  of  the  church  could  not  be  bound  to 
the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  because  the  church  had  changed  the  Sab- 
bath into  Sunday,  not  by  commandment  of  Christ,  but  solely  by  her  own 
authority.  This  destroyed  the  last  illusion,  and  it  was  hereby  declared 
that  tradition  signified  not  so  much  antiquity,  but  rather  continuing  in- 
spiration. "  * 

The  substance  of  this  argument  in  the  council  was  sim- 
ply this  :  — 

"The  Protestants  claim  to  stand  upon  the  written  word  only.  They 
profess  to  hold  the  Scripture  alone  as  the  standard  of  faith.  They 
justify  their  revolt  by  the  plea  that  the  church  has  apostatized  from  the 
written  word,  and  follows  tradition.  Now  the  Protestants'  claim,  that 
they  stand  upon  the  written  word  only,  is  not  true.  Their  profession  of 
holding  the  Scripture  alone  as  the  standard  of  faith  is  false.  PROOF: 
The  written  word  explicitly  enjoins  the  observance  of  the  seventh  day 
as  the  Sabbath.  They  do  not  observe  the  seventh  day,  but  reject  it.  If 
they  do  truly  hold  the  Scripture  alone  as  their  standard,  they  would  be 
observing  the  seventh  day  as  is  enjoined  in  the  Scripture  throughout ; 
yet  they  not  only  reject  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  enjoined  in  the 
written  word,  but  they  have  adopted  and  do  practice  the  observance  of 
Sunday,  for  which  they  have  only  the  tradition  of  the  church.  Conse- 
quently the  claim  of  'Scripture  alone  as  the  standard,'  fails  ;  and  the 
doctrine  of  '  Scripture  and  tradition '  as  essential,  is  fully  established, 
the  Protestants  themselves  being  judges." 5 


*  "  Kanon  and  Tradition,"  p.  263. 

5  The  archbishop's  own  words  are  these  :  "  The  condition  of  the  heretics 
nowadays  Is  such  that  they  do  not  appeal  to  anything  more  than  this  ['the 
Bible,  and  the  Bible  alone.'  '  The  Scriptures,  as  in  the  written  word,  the  sole 
standard  of  appeal  in  faith  and  morals,']  to  overthrow  the  church  under  the  pre- 
text of  following  the  word  of  God.  Just  as  though  the  church  —  the  body  — 
were  In  conflict  with  the  word  of  Christ,  or  as  if  the  head  could  be  against  the 
body.  Indeed,  this  very  authority  of  the  church  is  most  of  all  glorified  by  the  Holy 
Scriptures  ;  for  while  on  the  one  hand  the  church  recommends  the  word  of  God, 
declaring  it  to  be  divine,  and  presenting  it  to  us  to  be  read,  explaining  doubtful 
points,  and  faithfully  condemning  all  that  runs  counter  thereto;  on  the  other 
hand,  by  the  same  authority,  the  church,  the  legal  precepts  of  the  Lord,  con- 
tained in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  have  ceased.  The  Sabbath,  the  most  glorious  day 
in  the  law,  has  merged  into  the  Lord's  day.  .  .  .  This  day  and  similar  institu- 
tions have  not  ceased  in  consequence  of  the  preaching  of  Christ  (for  he  says 
that  he  did  not  come  to  destroy  the  law,  but  to  fulfill  it)  ;  but  yet  they  have 
been  changed,  and  that  solely  by  the  authority  of  the  church.  Now  if  this 


878  THE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

There  was  no  getting  around  this  ;  for  the  Protestants' 
own  statement  of  faith  —  the  Augsburg  Confession,  1530  — 
had  clearly  admitted  that  "the  observation  of  the  Lord's 
day"  had  been  appointed  by  "the  church"  only.  As  Dr. 
Holtzrnan  says,  this  argument  "destroyed  the  last  illusion." 
As  it  was  clear  that  Protestants  were  recognizing  tradition, 
the  uneasy  minds  in  the  council  were  set  at  rest. 

Thus  it  was  the  inconsistency  of  the  Protestant  practice 
with  the  Protestant  profession  which  gave  to  the  Catholic 
Church  her  long-sought  and  anxiously-desired  ground  upon 
which  to  condemn  Protestantism  and  the  whole  Reformation 
movement  as  only  a  selfishly  ambitious  rebellion  against 
church  authority.  And  in  this  vital  controversy,  the  key, 
the  culminative  expression  of  the  Protestant  inconsistency, 
was  in  the  rejection  of  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord,  the  seventh 
day,  as  enjoined  in  the  Scriptures,  and  the  adoption  and  ob- 
servance of  the  Sunday  as  enjoined  by  the  Catholic  Church. 

And  this  is  to-day  the  position  of  the  respective  parties  to 
this  controversy.  To-day  this  is  the  vital  issue  upon  which 
the  Catholic  Church  arraigns  Protestantism,  and  upon  which 
she  condemns  the  course  of  popular  Protestantism  as  being 
"  indefensible,  self-contradictory,  and  suicidal."6  Yet,  in 
spite  of  the  history  and  the  fact ;  in  spite  of  their  own 
knowledge  of  the  history  arid  the  fact ;  in  spite  of  the  Script- 
ure, and  in  spite  of  all  this  inconsistency,  the  professed 
Protestantism  of  to-day  persistently  stultifies  itself  not  only 
in  accepting  and  observing  Sunday,  but  also  by  violating 
every  principle  of  true  Protestantism,  and  acting  upon  papal 
principles  only,  in  maintaining  it. 

Here  are  some  words  of  as  much  solemn  weight  as  ever  ; 
as  true  to-day  and  of  the  popular  Protestantism  of  to-day  as 
they  were  of  the  apostate  religion  of  Luther's  day :  - 


authority  should  be  done  away  with  (which  would  please  the  heretics  very 
much),  who  would  there  be  to  testify  for  the  truth  and  to  confound  the  ob- 
stinacy of  the  heretics  ?  "  —  Id. 

6  See  Rome's  Challenge  in  Catholic  Mirror,  September  2,  9,  16,  23,  1893. 


PRINCIPLES  OF   THE  REFORMATION.  $79 

"The  Reformation  was  accomplished  in  the  name  of  a  spiritual 
principle.  It  had  proclaimed  for  its  teacher  the  word  of  God  ;  for  sal- 
vation, faith  ;  for  king,  Jesus  Christ  ;  for  arms,  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and 
had  by  these  very  means  rejected  all  worldly  elements.  Rome  had  been 
established  by  '  the  law  of  a  carnal  commandment ; '  the  Reformation, 
by  'the  power  of  an  endless  life.'  .  .  . 

"The  gospel  of  the  Reformers  had  nothing  to  do  ictih  the  icorld  and 
with  politics.  While  the  Roman  hierarchy  had  become  a  matter  of  di- 
plomacy and  a  court  intrigue,  the  Reformation  was  destined  to  exercise 
no  other  influence  over  princes  and  people  than  that  which  proceeds  from 
the  gospel  of  peace. 

"If  the  Reformation,  having  attained  a  certain  point,  became  untrue 
co  its  nature,  began  to  parley  and  temporize  with  the  world,  and  ceased 
thus  to  follow  up  the  spiritual  principle  that  it  had  so  loudly  proclaimed, 
it  was  faithless  to  God  and  to  itself.  Henceforward  its  decline  was  at 
hand. 

"It  is  impossible  for  a  society  to  prosper  if  it  be  unfaithful  to  the 
principles  it  lays  down.  Having  abandoned  what  constituted  its  life,  it 
can  find  naught  but  death. 

"It  was  God's  will  that  this  great  truth  should  be  inscribed  on  the 
very  threshold  of  the  temple  he  was  then  raising  in  the  world,  and  a 
striking  contrast  was  to  make  the  truth  stand  gloriously  prominent. 

"  One  portion  of  the  reform  was  to  seek  alliance  of  the  world,  and 
in  this  alliance  find  a  destruction  full  of  desolation. 

"Another  portion  looking  up  to  God,  was  haughtily  to  reject  the 
arm  of  the  flesh,  and  by  this  very  act  of  faith  secure  a  noble  victory. 

"  If  three  centuries  have  gone  astray,  it  is  because  they  were  unable 
to  comprehend  so  holy  and  so  solemn  a  lesson."  7 

As  the  case  stands  to-day,  it  is  demonstrated  that  not 
only  three  centuries,  but  three  and  a  half  centuries,  have 
gone  astray  because  of  their  unwillingness  or  their  inability 
to  comprehend  so  holy  and  so  solemn  a  lesson. 

It  is  true  that  in  this,  as  in  the  fourth  century,  the  church 
power  professes  that  the  course  which  she  has  taken  is  es- 
sential to  the  preservation,  and  in  this  the  salvation,  of  the 
nation.  But  look  at  the  situation  as  it  is  in  fact. 

The  church  of  Christ  is  the  divinely  appointed  means 
through  which  God  would  call  the  nations  to  seek  tlie  Lord, 
that  they  might  find  him,  and  be  delivered  from  this  pres- 

7 I)'Aubign6,  "  History  of  the  R?formation,"  book  xiv,  chap.  (. 
64 


880  THE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

ent  evil  world  :  what,  then,  when  these  professed  churches 
of  Christ  themselves  seek  the  power  of  this  present  evil 
world,  join  themselves  to  it,  and  put  their  dependence  upon 
it  ?  How  can  that  save  the  nation  ? 

The  church  of  Christ  is  the  divinely  appointed  agency  to 
"persuade  men"  to  join  themselves  to  the  Lord:  what,  then, 
when  these  professed  churches  of  Christ  threaten  congress- 
men, in  order  that  they  themselves  may  succeed  in  joining 
themselves  to  the  government  f  How  can  that  preserve  the 
State  or  save  the  nation  ? 

The  church  of  Christ  is  the  divinely  appointed  agency  to 
persuade  men  to  send  up  their  petitions,  to  the  Lord  for  help, 
and  for  deliverance  from  every  burden  and  from  every  evil : 
what,  then,  when  the  professed  churches  of  Christ  them- 
selves send  up  their  petitions  to  men,  even  though  the  men 
be  congressmen,  and  though  the  petitions  be  backed  up 
with  threats  ?  How  can  that  save  the  nation  ? 

Both  society  and  the  State  are  already  cursed  with  the 
insatiable  demand  for  office,  or  position  of  trust,  in  return 
for  political  service  rendered  :  what,  then,  when  the  pro- 
fessed churches  of  Christ  make  this  the  very  chosen  chan- 
nel through  which  they  would  make  successful  their  aims 
upon  the  State  ?  What  effect,  then,  can  this  have  upon 
society  and  the  State,  other  than  to  increase  this  curse  even 
to  ruinous  depths  ? 

Bribery  is  already  become  so  common  as  easily  to  frus- 
trate the  will  of  the  people  in  any  general  election  :  what, 
then,  when  these  churches  take  the  lead  in  "bribing  with  a 
monopoly  of  worldly  honors  and  emoluments  "  all  whom 
they  can  seduce  to  compliance  with  their  arbitrary  will,  re- 
gardless of  the  will  of  the  people,  whether  expressed  in 
the  supreme  law  or  in  the  direct  voice  of  the  people? 
What  can  be  the  effect  of  this  upon  the  State,  other 
than  to  increase  in  untold  ratio  the  already  too  general 
corruption  ? 


MARKS  OF  APOSTASY.  SSI 

By  the  enactment  of  wholesome  laws,  the  people 
have  been  doing  their  best  to  protect  themselves  from  the 
rule  of  the  tyrannical  spirit  of  the  boycott.  But  how  can 
the  people  protect  themselves  from  this  despotism,  when 
the  churches  control  the  law-making  power  for  the  general 
community,  and  make  the  boycott  in  all  business  relations 
their  chosen  means  by  which  to  force  submission  to  their 
will  in  the  local  community  ?  What,  then,  can  be  the  effect 
of  this,  other  than  so  to  cultivate  the  spirit  of  spying  and 
treachery  as  to  destroy  mutual  confidence  and  individual  in- 
tegrity, set  every  man's  hand  against  his  neighbor,  and  fill 
the  land  with  deceit  and  violence  ? 

Here,  then,  are  these  churches  professing  to  be  the 
churches  of  Christ,  yet  having  gone  away  from  him,  their 
rightful  Lord,  and  joined  themselves  to  another ;  professing 
to  minister  the  power  of  God,  yet  depending  upon  the  power 
of  man.  Professing  to  minister  the  gospel  of  Christ,  they 
actually  minister  the  laws  of  men.  Professing  to  persuade 
men  with  the  message  of  justification  \>y  faith  in  Christ,  they 
actually  compel  -men  by  the  condemnation  of  the  law  of  men. 
Professing  to  lead  in  the  way  of  righteousness,  uprightness, 
and  sincerity,  they  actually  lead  in  the  way  of  unrighteous- 
ness, corruption,  and  deceit.  Professing  themselves  to  be 
models  of  Protestantism,  they  have  actually  joined  hands 
with  Romanism,  and  follow  her  customs,  and  require  all  to 
receive  the  sign  of  her  authority.  Professing  to  be  the 
example  in  all  things  good,  they  actually  set  the  example 
in  the  chief  things  that  are  bad. 

Thus  again,  these  who  had  been  espoused  to  Christ,  who 
had  been  joined  to  him  in  the  bonds  of  heavenly  alliance, 
have  violated  their  vows  and  broken  their  marriage  bonds  to 
Him  who  is  perfect  in  power,  in  love,  and  purity.  Once 
more  these  have  forsaken  the  heavenly  power,  and  sought 
for  earthly  power.  They  have  forsaken  the  arm  of  the  Lord, 
and  have  put  their  confidence  in  the  arm  of  flesh.  They 


882  THE  SECOND   GREAT  APOSTASY. 

have  forsaken  the  heavenly  Husband,  and  have  formed  an 
adulterous  connection  with  an  earthly  lord.  Once  more  the 
unholy  church  has  formed  an  unholy  connection  with  the 
unholy  State.  And  once  more  the  very  first  fruit  of  it  is  a 
national  law  expressive  of  her  will  in  the  matter  of  Sunday 
observance,  and  the  rest  of  the  baleful  fruit  of  such  illicit 
connection  will  inevitably  follow. 

Is  it  at  all  strange,  therefore,  that  the  following  passage 
should  have  been  printed,  even  some  time  ago,  by  a  leading 
divine8  in  one  of  the  leading  "Protestant"  papers  of  the 
country  ?  Discussing  the  question  of  the  reunion  of  Chris- 
tendom, he  argues  for  it  against  certain  ones,  thus  :  — 

"You  would  exclude  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  the  mother  of  u-s  all, 
the  church  of  scholars  and  saints,  such  as  Augustine,  and  Aquinas,  and 
Bernard,  and  Fenelon  ;  the  church  of  all  races,  ranks,  and  classes,  which 
already  gives  signs  of  becoming  American  as  well  as  Roman.  .  .  .  You 
would  exclude  also  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  the  beautiful 
daughter  of  a  beautiful  mother." 

That  was  printed  February  9,  1888,  in  the  Evangelist, 
New  York  City,  one  of  the  two  leading  Presbyterian  papers 
of  the  country.  And  from  that  time  to  this,  never  have  we 
seen  or  heard  a  single  word  of  protest  or  dissent  from  any 
of  the  professed  evangelical  Protestant  churches  of  the 
country.  This  states  their  relationship  to  "Babylon,  the 
mother  of  harlots  "  as  that  of  daughters  ;  and  even  beautiful 
daughters,  after  the  "beautiful  mother."  Their  silence  is 
consent  that  the  relationship  is  correctly  stated.  And  their 
action  in  forsaking  their  rightful  Lord  and  entering  into  this 
illicit  union  with  another  is  positive  demonstration  that  the 
relationship  is  herein  correctly  given.  For  just  as  certainly 
as  the  original  apostasy  created  "Babylon  the  mother  of 
harlots  and  abominations  of  the  earth,"  just  so  certainly  this 
apostasy  in  our  day  and  in  our  country  has  created  the  har- 
lot daughters  of  "  Babylon  the  mother."  She  is  the  mother 
only  of  "harlots  and  abominations."  By  positive  statement 
it  has  been  said  of  them  and  for  them  that  they  are  her 

"Prof.  Cbas.  W.  Shields,  D.  p.,  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary,  N.  J. 


"COME  OUT  OF  HER,  MY  PEOPLE."  883 

daughters.  By  silence  they  have  confessed  it,  arid  by 
action  they  have  demonstrated  it.  And  it  is  so.  We  are 
sorry  ;  but  so  it  is. 

There  is  but  one  thing  more  that  they  can  possibly  do  in 
this  direction,  and  even  this  they  will  do  ;  that  is,  enter  into 
alliance  with  satanic  power  itself,  by  joining  hands  with 
Spiritualism.  This  they  will  do  as  certainly  as  they  have 
done  that  which  they  have  done.  Then  will  be  completely 
fulfilled  the  prophecy  which  now  is  but  partly  fulfilled. 
Rev.  xviii,  2,  3.  Then  also  the  world  will  hear  that  cry  of 
the  angel  of  the  Lord  which  comes  "  mightily  with  a  strong 
voice,  saying,  Babylon  the  great  is  fallen,  is  fallen,  and  is 
become  the  habitation  of  devils,  and  the  hold  of  every  foul 
spirit,  and  a  cage  of  every  unclean  and  hateful  bird.  For 
all  nations  have  drunk  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of  her  forni- 
cation, and  the  kings  of  the  earth  have  committed  fornica- 
tion with  her,  and  the  merchants  of  the  earth  are  waxed  rich 
through  the  abundance  of  her  delicacies." 

At  the  same  time  there  is  "heard  another  voice  from 
heaven,  saying,  Come  out  of  her,  my  people,  that  ye  be  not 
partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that  ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues. 
For  her  sins  have  reached  unto  heaven,  and  God  hath  re- 
membered her  iniquities."  Rev.  xviii,  4,  5.  Thank  the 
Lord,  there  are  yet  some  of  the  people  of  God  in  these 
churches.  There  are  yet  some  Christians  there  ;  but  they  can- 
not remain  there  much  longer  without  becoming  partakers  of 
her  sins.  They  cannot  stay  there  much  longer  and  remain 
Christians.  They  cannot  stay  there  much  longer  without 
receiving  of  her  plagues  and  of  the  judgments  of  God  upon 
her  iniquities.  Her  judgment  cometh  and  hasteth  greatly. 
"  Strong  is  the  Lord  God  that  judgeth  her." 

The  yielding  of  the  merchants  to  her  boycott  will  do 
them  no  good,  for  it  is  written  :  — 

"  And  the  merchants  of  the  earth  shall  weep  and  mourn  over  her  ; 
for  no  man  buyeth  their  merchandise  any  more  :  the  merchandise  of  gold, 
and  silver,  and  precious  stones,  and  of  pearls,  and  tine  linen,  and  purple, 


884  THE   SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY 

and  silk,  and  scarlet,  and  all  thyine-wood,  and  all  manner  vessels  of 
ivory,  and  all  manner  vessels  of  most  precious  wood,  and  of  brass,  and 
iron,  and  marble,  and  cinnamon,  and  odors,  and  ointments,  and  frankin- 
cense, and  wine,  and  oil,  and  fine  flour,  and  wheat,  and  beasts,  and 
sheep,  and  horses,  and  chariots,  and  slaves,  and  souls  of  men.  And  the 
fruits  that  thy  soul  lusted  after  are  departed  from  thee,  and  all  things 
which  were  dainty  and  goodly  are  departed  from  thee.  and  thou  shalt 
find  them  no  more  at  all.  The  merchants  of  these  things  which  were 
made  rich  by  her,  shall  stand  afar  off  for  the  fear  of  her  torment,  weep- 
ing and  wailing,  and  saying,  Alas,  alas,  that  great  city  that  was  clothed 
in  fine  linen,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and  decked  with  gold,  and  precious 
stones,  and  pearls  !  For  in  one  hour  so  great  riches  is  come  to  naught." 
Rev.  xviii,  11-17. 

The  popularity  and  patronage  which  legislators  hope  to 
have  from  pandering  to  her  desires,  will  likewise  do  them 
no  good,  for  it  is  written  :  "A  mighty  angel  took  up  a  stone 
like  a  great  millstone,  and  cast  it  into  the  sea,  saying,  Thus 
with  violence  shall  that  great  city  Babylon  be  thrown  down, 
and  shall  be  found  no  more  at  all."  Rev.  xviii,  21. 

Such  being  the  final  result  to  the  churches,  of  this  course 
of  evil  in  which  they  have  even  now  gone  so  far,  and  the 
churches  being  one  with  the  State  in  this  course,  it  is  in- 
evitable that  the  ruin  of  the  churches  will  be  the  ruin  also 
of  the  State.  Therefore  it  is  as  plain  as  A,  B,  C,  that  this 
course  upon  which  these  churches  have  entered  means  the 
destruction  of  the  State  and  the  ruin  of  the  nation.  What 
they  in  their  apostasy  and  bad  ambition  promise  shall  save 
the  nation,  only  proves  its  speedy  and  awful  ruin.  This  is 
certain. 

Not  only  is  this  evident  from  what  has  already  been  said, 
but  this  same  thing  has  been  worked  out  in  the  history 
of  the  Roman  empire,  for  the  instruction  of  all  people 
and  nations,  showing  clearly  enough  just  what  the  result 
must  be. 

In  the  case  of  the  Roman  empire,  however,  God  made 
the  savage  nations  of  the  North  the  instruments  of  his  judg- 
ment in  sweeping  away  the  mass  of  corruption  which  the 


THE  DAY  OF   THE   LORD  COMETH.  885 

union  of  Church  and  State  from  the  first  great  apostasy 
had  built  up  there.  But  in  this  case  where  can  any  such 
instruments  be  found  ? — There  are  none.  Civilization  has 
encompassed  the  earth.  Not  only  that,  but  in  this  case  "«// 
nations"  are  involved  in  the  corruption.  Where,  then,  shall 
the  Lord  find  a  people  to  execute  his  judgment  and  sweep 
away  this  mass  of  corruption  ?  For  the  reasons  given,  they 
cannot  be  found  upon  the  earth.  A  people  is  found,  how- 
ever, and  here  is  the  Lord's  description  of  them  :  — 

"Blow  ye  the  trumpet  in  Zion,  and  sound  an  alarm  in  my  holy 
mountain  :  let  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  tremble  :  for  the  day  of  the 
Lord  cometh,  for  it  is  nigh  at  hand:  a  day  of  darkness  and  of  gloominess, 
a  day  of  clouds  and  of  thick  darkness,  as  the  morning  upon  the  mount- 
ains :  a  great  people  and  a  strong  ;  there  hath  not  been  ever  ///6  like,  neither 
shall  be  any  more  after  it,  even  to  the  years  of  many  generations.  A  fire 
devoureth  before  them;  and  behind  them  a  flame  burneth:  the  land  is  as 
the  garden  of  Eden  before  them,  and  behind  them  a  desolate  wilderness; 
yea,  and  nothing  shall  escape  them.  The  appearance  of  them  is  as  the 
appearance  of  horses  ;  and  as  horsemen,  so  shall  they  run.  Like  the 
noise  of  chariots  on  the  tops  of  mountains  shall  they  leap  like  the  noise 
of  a  flame  of  fire  that  devoureth  the  stubble,  as  a  strong  people  set  in 
battle  array.  Before  their  face  the  people  shall  be  much  pained  :  all 
faces  shall  gather  blackness.  They  shall  run  like  mighty  men  ;  they 
shall  climb  the  wall  like  men  of  war  ;  and  they  shall  march  every  one  on 
his  ways,  and  they  shall  not  break  their  ranks  :  neither  shall  one  thrust 
another  ;  they  shall  walk  every  one  in  his  path  ;  and  when  they  fall  upon 
the  sword,  they  shall  not  be  wounded.  They  shall  run  to  and  fro  in  the 
city  ;  they  shall  run  upon  the  wall,  they  shall  climb  up  upon  the  houses  ; 
they  shall  enter  in  at  the  windows  like  a  thief.  The  earth  shall  quake 
before  them  ;  the  heavens  shall  tremble  •  the  sun  and  moon  shall  be 
dark,  and  the  stars  shall  withdraw  their  shining  :  and  the  Lord  shall 
utter  his  voice  before  his  army  :  for  his  camp  is  very  great  :  for  he  is 
strong  that  executeth  his  word  :  for  the  day  of  the  Lord  is  great  and 
very  terrible  ;  and  who  can  abide  it  ?"  Joel  ii,  1-11. 

"And  I  saw  heaven  opened,  and  behold  a  white  horse  ;  and  he  that 
sat  upon  him  was  called  Faithful  and  True,  and  in  righteousness  he  doth 
judge  and  make  war.  His  eyes  were  as  a  flame  of  fire,  and  on  his  head 
were  many  crowns  ;  and  he  had  a  name  written,  that  no  man  knew,  but 
he  himself.  And  he  was  clothed  with  a  vesture  dipped  in  blood  :  and 


THE  SECOND  GREAT  APOSTASY. 

his  name  is  called  the  Word  of  God.  And  the  armies  winch  were  in 
heaven  followed  him  upon  while  horses,  clothed  in  fine  linen,  white  and 
clean.  And  out  of  his  mouth  goeth  a  sharp  sword,  that  with  it  he 
should  smite  the  nations;  and  he  shall  rule  them  with  a  rod  of  iron: 
and  he  treadeth  the  winepress  of  the  fierceness  and  wrath  of  Almighty 
God.  And  he  hath  on  his  vesture  and  on  his  thigh  a  name  written,  KING 
OF  KINGS,  AND  LORD  OF  LORDS."  "And  I  saw  the  beast,  and  the 
kings  of  the  earth,  and  their  armies,  gathered  together  to  make  war 
against  him  that  sat  on  the  horse,  and  against  his  army  And  the  beast 
was  taken,  and  with  him  the  false  prophet  that  wrought  miracles  before 
him,  with  which  he  deceived  them  that  had  received  the  mark  of  the 
beast,  and  them  that  worshiped  his  image.  These  both  were  cast  alive 
into  a  lake  of  fire  burning  with  brimstone.  And  the  remnant  were  slain 
with  the  sword  of  him  that  sat  upon  the  horse,  which  sword  proceeded 
out  of  his  mouth  :  and  all  the  fowls  were  filled  with  their  flesh.  Rev. 
xix,  11-16,  19-21. 

"And  he  shall  send  his  angels  with  a  great  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and 
they  shall  gather  together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end 
of  heaven  to  the  other.  "  Matt,  xxiv,  31.  "  And  I  saw  as  it  were  a  sea 
of  glass  mingled  with  fire  :  and  them  that  had  gotten  the  victory  over 
the  beast,  and  over  his  image,  and  over  his  mark,  and  over  the  number 
of  his  name,  stand  on  the  sea  of  glass,  having  the  harps  of  God.  And 
they  sing  the  song  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God,  and  the  song  of  the 
Lamb,  saying,  Great  and  marvelous  are  thy  works,  Lord  God  Almighty  ; 
just  and  true  are  thy  ways,  thou  King  of  saints."  Rev.  xv,  2,  3. 

As  the  first  great  apostasy  developed  "the  beast,"  so  this 
second  great  apostasy  as  certainly  develops  "the  image  of 
the  beast."  Both  are  described  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of 
Revelation.  In  the  first  ten  verses  of  that  chapter  there  is 
given  a  description  of  the  rise  and  career  of  a  certain  power 
under  the  symbol  of  "a  beast."  Then  from  the  eleventh 
to  the  seventeenth  verse  inclusive,  there  is  given  the  descrip- 
tion of  another  power  under  the  symbol  of  "  another  beast" 
and  "the  image  of  the  beast."  The  first  of  these  powers  is 
also  designated  as  "the  first  beast"  and  "the  beast  which 
had  the  wound  by  a  sword."  The  full  description  of  the 
first  one  is  as  follows  :  - 

"And  I  stood  upon  the  sand  of  the  sea,  and  saw  a  beast  rise  up  out 
of  the  sea,  having  seven  heads  and  ten  horns,  and  upon  his  horns  ten 
crowns,  and  upon  his  heads  the  name  of  blasphemy,  And  the  beast 


DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  PAPACY.  887 

which  I  saw  was  like  unlo  a  leopard,  and  his  feet  were  as  the  feet  of  a 
bear,  and  his  mouth  :is  the  mouth  of  a  lion  :  and  the  dragon  gave  him  his 
power,  and  his  seat,  and  great  authority.  And  I  saw  one  of  his  heads  as 
it  were  wounded  to  death;  and  his  deadly  wound  was  healed:  and  all 
the  world  wondered  after  the  beast.  And  they  worshiped  the  dragon 
which  gave  power  unto  the  beast:  and  they  worshiped  the  beast,  saying, 
Who  is  like  unto  the  beast  ?  Who  is  able  to  make  war  with  him  ?  And 
there  was  given  unto  him  a  mouth  speaking  great  things  and  blasphemies  ; 
and  power  was  given  unto  him  to  continue  forty  and  two  months.  And 
he  opened  his  mouth  in  blasphemy  against  God,  to  blaspheme  his  name, 
and  his  tabernacle,  and  them  that  dwell  in  heaven.  And  it  was  given 
unto  him  to  make  war  with  the  saints,  and  to  overcome  them  :  and 
power  was  given  him  over  all  kindreds,  and  tongues,  and  nations.  And 
all  that  dwell  upon  the  earth  shall  worship  him,  whose  names  are  not 
written  in  the  book  of  life  of  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world.  If  any  man  have  an  ear,  let  him  hear.  He  that  leadeth  into 
captivity  shall  go  into  captivity  :  he  that  killeth  with  the  sword  must  be 
killed  with  the  sword.  Here  is  the  patience  and  the  faith  of  the  saints." 

Every  person  not  a  Catholic,  who  knows  the  A,  B,  C  of 
history  knows  that  this  is  a  vivid  sketch  of  the  papacy  and 
its  career  up  to  1 708  A.  i>.  Every  such  person  knows  that 
the  one  great  power  to  which  all  the  nations  have  done 
homage  the  most,  and  for  the  longest  time,  is  the  papacy. 
Every  such  person  knows  that  the  most  blasphemous  power 
that  was  ever  on  the  earth  is  the  papacy.  He  likewise 
knows  that  the  one  power  that  has  made  war  with  the  saints 
of  God,  and  has  overcome  them  the  most  cruelly,  and  has 
persecuted  them  the  most  widely  and  for  the  longest  time, 
is  the  papacy.  We  know  that  to  say  this  is  not  considered 
as  proper  Protestantism  for  these  days  ;  but  proper  Protest- 
antism it  is,  nevertheless.  For  all  this  is  true  of  the 
papacy,  and  has  been  true  of  it  for  ages.  And  everybody, 
Catholic,  or  non-Catholic,  knows  that  the  papacy  is  the 
union  of  Church  and  State,  with  the  Church  in  possession  of 
the  power  of  the  State  to  use  in  enforcing  her  decrees,  and 
compelling  men  to  submit  to  her  dictation. 

The  description  of  the  '.'other  beast,"  or  the  image  of 
the  beast,  is  as  follows  :  — 


888  TEE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

"  And  I  beheld  another  beast  coming  up  out  of  the  earth;  and  be 
had  two  horns  like  a  lamb,  and  spake  as  a  dragon.  And  lie  exerciseth 
all  the  power  of  the  first  beast  before  him,  and  causeth  the  earth  and 
them  which  dwell  therein  to  worship  the  first  beast,  whose  deadly 
wound  was  healed.  And  he  doeth  great  wonders,  so  that  he  maketh 
fire  come  down  from  heaven  on  the  earth  in  the  sight  of  men,  and  de- 
ceiveth  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth  by  the  means  of  those  miracles 
which  he  had  power  to  do  in  the  sight  of  the  beast  ;  saying  to  them  that 
dwell  on  the  earth,  that  they  should  make  an  image  to  the  beast,  which  had 
the  wound  by  a  sword,  and  did  live.  And  he  had  power  to  give  life 
unto  the  image  of  the  beast,  that  the  image  of  the  beast  should  both 
speak,  and  cause  that  as  many  as  would  not  worship  the  image  of  the 
beast  should  be  killed.  And  he  causeth  all,  both  small  and  great,  rich 
and  poor,  free  and  bond,  to  receive  a  mark  in  their  right  hand, 
or  in  their  foreheads  :  and  that  no  man  might  buy  or  sell,  save  he 
that  had  the  mark,  or  the  name  of  the  beast,  or  the  number  of  his 
name." 

This  prophecy  says  that  it  would  be  said  unto  them  that 
"they  should  make  an  image  to  the  beast."  This  would  be 
to  make  an  image  to  the  papacy.  The  papacy  being  a  union 
of  Church  and  State,  with  the  Church  using  the  power  of  the 
State  to  enforce  the  doctrines  of  the  church  and  to  compel 
submission  to  her  decrees,  the  making  of  an  image  of  this 
would  be  only  to  make  or  establish  an  order  of  things  by 
which  a  union  of  Church  and  State  would  be  created,  with 
the  civil  power  in  the  hands  of  the  church  to  compel  submis- 
sion to  the  church  doctrines,  and  observance  of  church  insti- 
tutions. But  in  order  for  this  to  be  made,  it  must  be  that 
before  this  there  was  no  union  of  Church  and  State  in  the 
place  where  this  is  to  be  done.  As  it  is  necessary  to  say 
"that  they  should  make  an  image  "  of  the  papacy, —  that  is, 
union  of  Church  arid  State, — it  is  plain  on  the  face  of  it  that 
this  is  said  and  must  be  said,  in  a  place  where  there  is  no 
union  of  Church  and  State,  and  where  the  church  has 
no  control  of  civil  affairs  and  no  connection  with  the  civil 
power. 

Now  where  was  there  ever  a  place  or  a  nation  on  earth 
in  which  there  was  no  union  of  Church  and  State  except  in 
the  United  States  alone  ?  With  the  single  exception  of  the 


THE  PLACE  OF  THE  IMAGE  OF  THE  BEAST.    889 

United  States  government,  there  never  was  a  government  on 
earth,  pagan,  papal,  or  professed  Protestant,  in  which  from 
the  beginning  of  its  existence,  as  such,  until  this  day,  there 
was  no  union  of  religion  and  the  State  ;  in  which  the  relig- 
ious power  had  no  control  of,  or  connection  with,  the  civil 
power.  This  is  the  truth,  and  any  one  may  satisfy  himself 
of  it  by  thinking,  whether  little  or  much.  This  being  the 
truth,  it  follows  that  in  the  United  States  is  the  only  place 
on  earth  where  it  could  be  said  that  they  should  make  a 
union  of  Church  and  State.  Consequently,  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  alone  could  the  image  of  the 
beast  —  the  image  of  the  papacy  —  be  made.  There  are 
many  other  points  corroborative  of  this,  but  this  is  sufficient 
for  this  place. 

Because  of  this  prophecy  of  Rev.  xiii,  11-17,  it  has 
been  preached  and  published  by  the  Seventh-day  Adventists 
for  more  than  forty  years  that  there  would  be  formed  in  the 
United  States  a  union  of  Church  and  State,  with  national 
Sunday  legislation  —  that  there  would  be  made  here  an 
image  of  the  papacy.  For  instance  :  more  than  forty  years 
ago  —  January,  1853  —  a  little  pamphlet  of  about  seventy- 
five  pages,  perhaps  2£  x  5  inches  in  size,  was  published, 
giving  a  brief  exposition  of  Revelation  13,  and  especially 
that  part  in  verses  11-17.  On  this  point  there  was  then 
written  and  printed  the  following :  — 

"  The  two-horned  beast  says  to  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth,  '  Make  an 
image."  The  dwellers  on  the  earth,  or  territory  of  this  beast,  it  seems, 
have  a  part  to  act  in  this  work.  This  clearly  marks  the  United  States  as 
the  scene  of  action.  This  is  the  manner  in  which  laws  are  made  here 
—  by  the  representatives  of  the  people.  As  all  men  by  the  Declaration 
are  declared  to  be  equal,  it  became  necessary  that  some  course  should  be 
taken  by  which  all  could  have  equal  privileges  in  the  construction  of  the 
laws.  If  the  whole  mass  were  called  together,  there  would  be  an  end- 
less discussion  and  no  laws  made.  Therefore  the  people  were  to  elect 
such  representatives  as  would  carry  out  their  principles  ;  and  they  were 
to  meet  and  make  laws,  which,  when  passed,  should  be  considered  the 
laws  of  the  people.  The  image  is  to  be  formed  by  the  people  or  their  rep- 
resentatives. 


890  THE  SECOND    ORE  AT  APOSTASY. 

"  It  appears  probable  to  us  that  this  Sunday  institution  is  the  very 
point  on  which  this  union  will  be  effected.  Here  is  a  point  on  which  all 
Protestant  sects  can  unite.  A  point  which  we  may  safely  say  is  the  im- 
portant item  in  the  faith  of  Protestants  is  their  Sunday  worship. 

"Verse  15. —  'And  he  had  power  to  give  life  unto  the  image  of  the 
beast,  that  the  image  of  the  beast  should  both  speak,  and  cause  that  as 
many  as  would  not  worship  the  image  of  the  beast  should  be  killed.' 
From  this  text  we  may  draw  two  conclusions :  — 

"  1.  The  image  of  the  beast  is  to  be  made  in  the  same  territory 
where  the  two-horned  beast  rules  ;  for  the  two-horned  beast  can  exer- 
cise that  authority  in  no  territory  but  its  own. 

"2.  That  it  already  has  it  in  its  power  to  give  life  to  the  image  of 
the  beast,  or  cause  the  decree  to  be  made  and  executed.  Is  it  not  in  the 
power  of  the  United  States  to  pass  such  laws  ?  They  declare  '  all  men 
shall  be  protected  in  worshiping  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  their 
own  consciences.'  We  see  the  mass  hold  the  first  day  of  the  week  as  a 
holy  day.  If  a  memorial  should  be  sent  in  to  Congress  with  one  million 
names  signed  to  it,  declaring  that  their  rights  were  infringed  upon,  and 
praying  them  to  pass  a  solemn  enactment  that  the  first  day  should  not  be 
profaned  by  labor,  how  soon  the  result  would  be  a  law  upon  the  point ! 
"Were  the  United  States,  as  a  body,  to  pass  a  law  that  Sunday  should 
be  kept  holy,  or  not  profaned  by  labor,  there  would  be,  I  conceive,  an 
image  to  the  papacy  ;  for  the  law  would  then  be  in  the  hands  of  the 
church,  and  she  could  inflict  penalties  on  those  who  did  not  obey  the 
Sunday  institution." 

Bear  in  mind  that  on  the  strength  of  that  scripture,  this 
was  printed  in  1853.  And  no  man  can  deny  that  in  1892  the 
very  things  were  done  which  in  this  exposition  of  the  proph- 
ecy were  said  would  be  done.  The  churches  professedly 
representing  millions  of  petitioners,  did  that  year  memo- 
rialize Congress  with  threats  in  behalf  of  Sunday  sacredness; 
and  how  soon  the  result  was  a  law  upon  the  point ! 

Again :  in  1884,  this  same  denomination  printed  the 
following  on  the  same  prophecy  —  Rev.  xiii,  11-17  :  — 

"By  this  first  beast  is  represented  the  Roman  Church,  an  ecclesias- 
tical body  clothed  with  civil  power,  having  authority  to  punish  all  dis- 
senters. The  image  of  the  beast  represents  another  religious  body 
clothed  with  similar  power.  The  formation  of  this  image  /*  the  work  of 
that  beast  whose  peaceful  rise  and  mild  professions  render  it  so  striking 
a  symbol  of  the  United  States.  Here  is  to  be  found  an  image  of  the 


THE  MAKING   OF   THE  IMAGE.  891 

papacy.  When  the  churches  of  our  land,  uniting  upon  such  points  of 
faith  as  are  held  by  them  in  common,  shall  influence  the  State  to  enforce 
their  decrees  and  sustain  their  institutions,  then  will  Protestant  America 
have  formed  an  image  of  the  Roman  hierarchy."9 

This  has  been  done.  The  churches  of  our  land  have 
united  upon  the  Sunday  issue,  and  then  united  with  the 
Catholic  Church  itself,  and  in  this  unity  they  have  influenced 
the  State  to  enforce  the  church  decree  for  Sunday  observ- 
ance, and  to  sustain  the  church  institution  of  Sunday. 
They  have  done  it.  And  in  the  doing  of  it,  they  have  made 
the  living  image  of  the  papacy  in  this  land.  Nine  years 
before  this  was  done,  we  published  that  it  would  be  done  ; 
and  now  it  has  been  done.  On  the  strength  of  the  prophecy 
we  published  that  it  would  come  ;  and  on  the  strength  of 
facts,  everybody  may  know  that  it  has  come.  The  prophecy 
is  fulfilled.  The  image  of  the  beast  is  made,  and  lives  in  the 
United  States  to-day. 

Once  more  :  in  1885  this  same  people  published  on  the 
same  subject  these  words  :  — 

"To  secure  popularity  and  patronage,  legislators   will  yield    to   the 
demand  for  a  Sunday  law."  l° 

To  secure  the  popularity  and  patronage  which  were  put 
up  at  public  auction  by  the  churches,  our  nation's  legislators 
assembled  in  Congress  did  yield  to  the  demand  for  a  Sun- 
day law. 

In  the  light  and  upon  the  strength  of  the  prophecy,  we 
published  seven  years  before  that  they  would  do  it.  And 
now  in  their  own  words,  we  can  publish  and  do  publish, 
that  they  have  done  it.11  The  prophecy  is  fulfilled.  The 
image  of  the  beast  is  made,  and  lives,  in  the  United  States 
to-day. 

That  which  now  remains  is  for  it  to  go  on  and  cause  all, 
both  small  and  great,  rich  and  poor,  free  and  bond,  to  re- 


9  "Great  Controversy,"  Vol.  iv,  p.  278. 
JO  "  Testimony,  No.  32,"  p.  207.  "  Pages  £07,  808. 


892  THE  SECOND    ORE  AT  APOSTASY. 

ceive  the  mark  of  the  beast,  and  carry  on  the  general  and 
universal  boycott  upon  all  who  refuse  to  keep  Sunday,  by 
which  no  one  may  buy  or  sell  save  he  that  has  the  mark,  or 
the  name  of  the  beast,  or  the  number  of  his  name.  But 
upon  this  — 

WHAT  SAITH  THE  LORD  ? 

"And  I  saw  another  angel  fly  in  the  midst  of  heaven,  having  the 
everlasting  gospel  to  preach  unto  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth,  and  to 
every  nation,  and  kindred,  and  tongue,  and  people,  saying  with  a  loud 
voice,  Fear  God,  and  give  glory  to  him  ;  for  the  hour  of  his  judgment  is 
come  :  and  worhip  him  that  made  heaven,  and  earth,  and  the  sea,  and 
the  fountains  of  waters. 

"And  there  followed  another  angel,  saying,  Babylon  is  fallen,  is 
fallen,  that  great  city,  because  she  made  all  nations  drink  of  the  wine  of 
the  wrath  of  her  fornication. 

''And  the  third  angel  followed  them,  saying  with  a  loud  voice,  If 
any  man  worship  the  beast  and  his  image,  and  receive  his  mark  in  his  fore- 
head, or  in  his  hand,  the  same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath  of 
God,  which  is  poured  out  without  mixture  into  the  cup  of  his  indigna- 
tion ;  and  he  shall  be  tormented  with  fire  and  brimstone  in  the  presence 
of  the  holy  angels,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb  :  and  the  smoke  of 
their  torment  ascendeth  up  forever  and  ever  :  and  they  have  no  rest  day 
nor  night,  who  worship  the  beast  and  his  image,  and  whosoever  receiv- 
eth  the  mark  of  his  name.  Here  is  the  patience  of  the  saints  :  here  are 
they  that  keep  the  commandments  of  God,  and  the  faith  of  Jesus. 

"And  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven  saying  unto  me,  Write,  Blessed 
are  the  dead  which  die  in  the  Lord  from  henceforth  :  Yea,  saith  the 
Spirit,  that  they  may  rest  from  their  labors  ;  and  their  works  do  follow 
them.  And  I  looked,  and  behold  a  white  cloud,  and  upon  the  cloud  one 
sat  like  unto  the  Son  of  man,  having  on  his  head  a  golden  crown,  and  in 
his  hand  a  sharp  sickle.  And  another  angel  came  out  of  the  temple, 
crying  with  a  loud  voice  to  him  that  sat  on  the  cloud,  Thrust  in  thy 
sickle,  and  reap  ;  for  the  time  is  come  for  thee  to  reap ;  for  the  harvest  of 
the  earth  is  ripe.  And  he  that  sat  on  the  cloud  thrust  in  his  sickle  on  the 
earth  ;  and  the  earth  was  reaped."  -Rev.  xiv,  6-16. 

Just  here  while  all  are  to  be  compelled  to  worship  the 
papacy  and  its  image,  and  to  receive  its  mark,  the  Lord 
sends  the  everlasting  gospel  to  all,  calling  them  to  worship 
him  alone,  who  made  heaven,  and  earth,  and  the  sea,  and 
the  fountains  of  waters,  for  the  hour  of  his  judgment  is  come. 


THE  SABBATH  A   SIGN  OF   GOD'S  POWER.  893 

And  the  sign  which  he  himself  has  set  up  that  men  may 
know  that  he  is  the  Lord,  the  true  God,  who  made  heaven 
and  earth  and  the  sea  and  the  fountains  of  waters,  is  the 
Sabbath  of  the  Lord.  Ezek.  xx,  20;  Ex.  xxxi,  IT;  xx,  8-11. 
There  is  also  made  the  announcement  of  the  fall  of  Babylon; 
and  then  the  dreadful  warning  against  obedience  to  the  de- 
crees of  the  papacy  anywhere,  or  its  image  here  in  the 
United  States.  And  the  next  thing  that  follows  is  the 
coming  of  the  Lord  to  reap  the  harvest  of  the  earth.  And 
the  harvest  is  the  end  of  the  world.  Matt,  xiii,  39. 

And  this  is  how  we  have  krunon  all  these  years  that  there 
would  be  a  union  of  Church  and  State  formed  in  the  United 
States  with  national  Sunday  legislation.  This  is  why  we  have 
been  telling  the  people  by  voice  and  pen,  in  every  place  and 
in  every  way,  all  these  years,  that  this  was  coming.  Now  it 
is  here,  and  no  man  can  deny  it.  Here  are  the  words  which 
we  published  years  ago  that  it  would  come,  and  no  man  can 
deny  that.  Men  may  disbelieve  it,  but  they  cannot  deny  it; 
they  may  reject  it,  but  they  cannot  disprove  it. 

While  we  were  telling  it,  many  would  not  believe  it,  and 
said  it  would  never  come.  We  knew  it,  and  published  that 
it  would  come.  Now  it  has  come.  It  is  here.  And  this 
demonstrates  unmistakably  that  we  were  right.  To  all  these 
we  now  say,  Come  now  and  stand  with  us,  that  you  may  be 
in  the  right  now  on  this  great  question. 

The  apostasy  of  Protestantism  exalts  the  papacy,  because 
this  is  an  open  confession  to  the  world  that  the  papal  princi- 
ples alone  are  correct.  The  making  of  the  image  to  the 
beast  restores  and  magnifies  the  power  of  the  beast.  Rev. 
xiii,  12.  This,  as  pointed  out  on  page  7r>9,  brings  about  the 
situation  described  in  Rev.  xiii,  8.  And  this  in  turn  de- 
velops the  fulfillment  of  Rev.  xviii,  8.  The  scheme  of  Leo 
XIII,  as  stated  on  pages  844,  845,  is  thus  caused  to  succeed. 
The  kings  and  nations  that  have  been  separated  from  her, 
are  drawn  back  into  illicit  connection  with  her ;  once  more 
she  guides  and  dominates  the  nations.  Consequently  she 


894  THE   SECOND    GEE  AT  APOSTASY. 

glorifies  herself  and  lives  deliciously  ;  the  kings  of  the  earth 
commit  fornication  and  live  deliciously  with  her,  as  did  the 
false  prophets  with  Jezebel  of  old  ;  and  therefore  she  con- 
gratulates herself,  saying  in  her  heart,  "I  sit  a  queen,  and 
am  no  widow,  and  shall  see  no  sorrow."  And  saith  the 
Lord:  "Therefore  shall  her  plagues  come  in  one  day, 
death,  and  mourning,  and  famine ;  and  she  shall  be  utterly 
burned  with  fire  ;  for  strong  is  the  Lord  God  who  judgeth 
her."  Yerse  9. 

The  apostasy  of  Protestantism  restores  and  exalts  the 
papacy,  and  so  assures  the  success  of  Leo's  scheme.  Leo's 
scheme  embraces  Ameriga,  and  through  this  Europe,  and 
through  these,  "all  humanity;"  in  short.it  embraces  the 
world.  This  is  precisely  the  thing  that  the  prophecy  an- 
nounced long  ago  that  the  papacy  would  do.  The  success 
of  this  scheme  marks  the  perdition,  and  absolute  ruin,  of  the 
papacy.  This  ruin  therefore  of  the  papacy  marks  the  ruin 
of  the  world,  the  end  of  the  reign  of  evil,  the  perfect  reign 
of  righteousness  —  the  complete  annihilation  of  the  mystery 
of  iniquity  and  the  everlasting  triumph  of  the  mystery  of 
God.  Rev.  xvi,  17-19  ;  xviii  and  xix. 

The  movements,  both  earthly  and  heavenly  which  are  to 
accomplish  this  eternal  consummation  are  now  in  active 
progress  before  the  eyes  of  all  the  world. 

In  the  very  latest  days  of  the  closing  up  of  these  pages 
for  the  press,  there  has  occurred  in  the  progress  of  Leo's 
scheme  that  which  is  worthy  of  note  at  this  point  in  our 
book.  A  short  dispatch  dated  Baltimore,  Md.,  September 
21,  1894,  announcing  the  arrival  from  Rome,  of  Bishop 
Keane,  Rector  of  the  Catholic  University  at  Washington, 
D.  C.,  reported  from  the  Bishop  the  following  : — 

"  In  speaking  of  the  relations  of  the  Quirinal  [the  Italian  Capitol] 
to  the  Vatican,  Bishop  Keane  said  that  the  policy  of  the  pope,  in  view 
of  the  recent  overtures  in  Italy,  is  the  union  of  tlie  church  with  the  great 
democratic  powers  of  the  future — that  is  America  and  France.  This  is 
his  hope,  and  toward  it  all  his  remarkable  energies  are  bent."  1Z 
12  Chicago  Herald,  September  22,  1894. 


THE   UNITED  STATES  "A    CATHOLIC  NATION"!       895 

And  in  a  long  dispatch  dated  at  New  York  three  days 
later,  September  24,  it  is  stated  that  Bishop  Keane  was 
''the  bearer  of  a  rescript  from  Pope  Leo  XIII,"  of  which 
the  purport  is  given  in  the  following  words  : — 

"  The  papal  rescript  elevates  the  United  States  to  the  first  rank  as  a 
Catholic  nation.  Heretofore  this  country  has  stood  before  the  church  as 
a  '  missionary '  country.  It  had  no  more  recognition  officially  at  Home 
than  had  China.  ...  By  the  new  rescript  the  country  is  freed  from 
the  propaganda  and  is  declared  to  l>e  a  Catholic  country  in  wl\ose  people 
the  pope  has  amplest  confidence  and  on  whom  he  confers  the  rights  of 
self-government,  subject  only  to  the  holy  see  on  matters  of  faith.  In  a 
way  this  remarkable  action  of  the  Roman  pontiff  may  be  looked  on  as 
the  most  astonishing  of  all  the  stupendous  effects  wrought  in  the  world 
by  the  American  republic.  The  United  States  is  considered  by  the  pope 
as  the  most  promising  field  in  the  world  for  the  church." 

"The  importance,  not  only  to  Catholics,  but  to  all  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  of  this  radical  change  in  the  relations  to  Rome  of  the 
church  in  America,  can  scarcely  be  overestimated.  It  is  a  declaration  of 
independence  for  American  Catholics.  It  is  in  effect  giving  the  official 
sanction  of  the  infallible  head  of  the  church  to  the  principles  and 
policy  preached  and  practised  by  Cardinal  Gibbons,  Archbishop  Ireland, 
Bishops  Spalding,  Keane  and  others  of  the  '  American  school '  among 
the  Catholic  hierarchy.  It  is  a  decision  declaring  as  acceptable  to 
Catholic  faith  the  American  idea  of  total  separation  of  Church  and 
State"!  !^ 

What  the  pope  means  by  the  "total  separation  of 
Church  and  State "  was  defined  by  Bishop  Keane  at  the 
University,  September  23,  1894,  in  the  following  words  :— 

"  The  world  he  [Leo  XIII1  likens  to  the  man,  in  that  the  Church 
represents  the  soul,  and  the  State  the  body."  u 

These  things,  in  view  of  the  situation  and  aims  of  the 
papacy  as  set  forth  on  pages  838-850  of  this  book,  show  a 
marked  and  rapid  progress. 

The  course  of  this  progress  from  its  present  stage  to  the 
consummation  can  be  well  and  easily  traced  by  carefully 

13  Lansing  (Mich.)  Republican,  September  24,  1894. 
"  Catholic  Standard,  October  13,  1S94,  page  2,  second  column. 
65 


896  THE  SECOND   GREAT  APOSTASY. 

reviewing  pages  109-520  of  this  history.  For  there  is  seen 
the  development  and  working  of  the  beast  ;  and  this  which 
is  now  to  be  fully  developed  and  to  work  is  the-living  like- 
ness, image,  of  the  beast.  He  who  would  readily  recognize 
the  likeness  must  study  the  original. 


CONCLUSION. 

As  for  us,  our  position  is  and  shall  continue  to  be  pre- 
cisely what  it  always  has  been.  We  propose  to  worship 
Him  alone  who  made  the  heaven  and  the  earth,  and  the  sea 
and  the  fountains  of  waters.  We  propose  to  heed  faithfully 
the  message  from  God  warning  against  the  worship  of  the 
beast  and  his  image  and  receiving  his  mark  or  the  number 
of  his  name.  We  say  forever  :  "Nay,  we  will  not  regard 
the  institution  of  the  beast." 

We  know  that  in  this  contest  there  is,  and  will  be,  ar- 
rayed against  us  all  the  power  that  earth  knows,  with  this 
power  under  the  direction  of  the  papacy,  and  the  whole 
combination  stirred  up  and  urged  on  by  Satan  from  beneath. 
But  above  all  this  we  ~know,  and  are  glad  in  the  knowledge 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  with  us,  and  he  has  said  to  us,  "All 
power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye 
therefore,  .  .  .  and,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world."  Christ  has  said  it.  It  is  so,  and  we 
know  it.  Therefore  though  all  the  power  that  earth  knows 
be  arrayed  against  us,  we  shall  come  off  more  than  con- 
querors through  him  that  hath  loved  us  and  washed  us  from 
our  sins  in  his  own  blood.  So  that  we  may  boldly  say, 
"The  Lord  is  my  helper,  and  I  will  not  fear  what  man  shall 
do  unto  me." 

We  know  that  we  shall  be  reproached.  We  know  that 
we  shall  be  denounced.  We  know  that  "anarchist,"  "in- 
fidel," "  atheist,"  and  every  other  opprobrious  epithet  will 
be  applied  to  us.  We  know  that  we  shall  be  despised,  and 


WHAT  SHALL    WE   DOf  897 

that  we  shall  be  even  the  despised  of  the  despised.  We 
know  that  we  shall  be  counted,  and  made,  of  no  reputation. 
But  we  rest  perfectly  easy  in  our  trust  in  Him,  and  our  com- 
plete dependence  upon  him  who  "made  himself  of  no  repu- 
tation-," in  order  that  we  might  have  his  matchless  character. 
We  know  that  we  shall  have  no  reputation.  But  ah  !  we 
know  that  we  have  the  divine  character  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  is  well  pleasing  to  God.  For  ''now  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  without  the  law  is  manifested,  being  witnessed 
by  the  law  and  the  prophets  ;  even  the  righteousness  of  God 
which  is  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  all  and  upon  all  them 
that  believe."  And  we  do  believe  in  him,  the  glorious  Son 
of  God.  It  is  not  true  that  "the  dearest  treasure  that  mor- 
tal times  afford,  is  spotless  reputation.''  It  is  everlastingly 
and  infinitely  true  that  the  dearest  treasure  that  either  mor- 
tal or  immortal  times  afford,  is  spotless  diameter.  And  that 
is  alone  the  character  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  wrought 
out  in  his  humiliation.  That  character  is  ours  as  an  ever- 
lasting gift  by  faith  in  him.  Men  may  take  away  our  repu- 
tation. But  we  do  not  care  for  that,  as  we  have  a  character 
which  they  cannot  touch,  for  it  is  the  gift  of  God. 

We  know  that  a  general  boycott  will  be  placed  against 
us  by  which  we  can  neither  buy  nor  sell,  nor  conduct  any 
business.  But  for  this  we  do  not  care.  For  "  ye  have  not 
received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear ;  but  ye  have  re- 
ceived the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba,  Father. 
The  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are 
the  children  of  God  :  and  if  children,  then  heirs  :  heirs  of 
God,  and  joint  heirs  with  Christ ;  if  so  be  that  we  suffer 
with  him,  that  we  may  be  also  glorified  together."  Rom. 
viii,  15-17.  "Joint  heirs  with  Christ"  are  we.  Of  what  is 
he  heir?  God  hath  appointed  him  "heir  of  all  things,  by 
whom  also  he  made  the  worlds."  Heb.  i,  2.  He  being  heir 
of  all  things,  and  we  being  joint  heirs  with  him,  we  there- 
fore are  just  as  certainly  heirs  of  all  things  as  is  he.  And 
so  he  tells  us,  "All  things  are  yours;  whether  Paul,  or 


898  TEE  SECOND    GREAT  APOSTASY. 

Apollos,  or  Cephas,  or  the  world,  or  life,  or  death,  or 
things  present,  or  things  to  come  ;  all  are  yours  ;  and  ye  are 
Christ's;  and  Christ  is  God's."  1  Cor.  iii,  21-23.  So 
when  they  take  away  from  us  all  things  of  earth,  we  still 
have  left  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth.  And  God  has 
promised  that  our  bread  shall  not  fail ;  but  that  bread  shall 
be  given  us,  and  our  waters  shall  be  sure.  Isa.  li,  12-14  ; 
xxxiii,  16. 

We  know  that  the  time  wjll  come  when  men  will  think 
that  he  that  killeth  us  will  be  doing  God  service.  And  we 
know  indeed  that  a  decree  will  go  forth  that  we  shall  even 
be  killed.  But  for  this  we  do  not  care.  For  "this  is  the 
record,  that  God  hath  given  to  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life 
is  in  his  Son.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life."  And  we 
have  him.  He  gave  himself  a  free  gift  to  us,  and  he  is  ours. 
Christ  is  our  life,  and  our  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God,  and 
no  man  can  touch  it.  Therefore  we  fear  not  them  who  can 
kill  the  body,  but  after  that  have  no  more  that  they  can  do. 
Christ  is  our  life.  He  is  the  Life-giver.  And  he  can  and 
will  raise  the  dead. 

Christ,  Christ  is  our  refuge,  our  hope,  our  confidence, 
our  power,  our  righteousness,  our  wealth,  our  life.  And 
we  stand  in  this  contest  with  no  other  calculation  nor  con- 
sideration. 

So  we  are  not  at  all  uneasy,  nor  any  way  in  doubt  as  to 
the  outcome.  We  knew  that  this  was  coming,  which  has 
come.  We  know  that  the  rest  of  the  events  which  we  have 
pointed  out  as  connected  with  this,  will  come,  as  surely  as 
this  already  has  come.  And  we  know  that  the  culmination 
of  all  these  events  is  that  grand,  triumphant  scene,  in 
which  the  prophet  "saw  as  it  were  a  sea  of  glass  mingled 
with  fire  :  and  them  that  had  gotten  the  victory  over  the 
beast,  and  over  his  image,  and  over  his  mark,  and  over  the 
number  of  his  name,  stand  on  the  sea  of  glass,  having 
the  harps  of  God.  And  they  sing  the  song  of  Moses  the 
servant  of  God,  and  the  song  of  the  Lamb,  saying,  Great  and 


OUR    VICTORY  SURE.  89 0 

marvelous  are  thy  works,  Lord  God  Almighty  ;  just  and  true 
are  thy  ways,  thou  King  of  saints.  Who  shall  not  fear 
thee,  O  Lord,  and  glorify  thy  name?  for  thou  only  art  holy : 
for  all  nations  shall  come  and  worship  before  thee  ;  for  thy 
judgments  are  made  manifest."  Rev.  xv,  2-4. 

This  is  what  we  have  in  view.  This  victory,  this  triumph 
is  promised  to  us  ;  and  it  will  surely  come.  For  it  we  wait 
patiently  and  confidently.  And  to  all  the  people  we  say  as 
did  David  to  Abiathar  :  "Abide  thou  with  us,  fear  not ;  for 
he  that  seeketh  our  lives  seeketh  thy  life  :  but  with  us  thou 
shalt  be  in  safeguard."  1  Sam.  xxii,  23.  "  Come  thou  with 
us,  and  we  will  do  thee  good  :  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  good 
concerning  Israel." 


mRMFRITRN     SFNTTNFI       An   Eight-page   Weekly  Journal,    de- 
111  ILUlUin     JLHlini-L.     voted  to  the  defence  of  American  insti- 
tutions,  the  preservation  of  the  United  States  Constitution  ns  it  is,  BO  far  as  regards  re- 
ligion or  religious  tests,  and  the  maintenance  of  human  rights,  both  civil  and  religious. 

Edited  by  ALONZO  T.  JONES. 

It  will  ever  be  uncompromisingly  opposed  to  anything  tending  toward  a  union  of 
Church  and  State,  whether  in  name  or  in  fact. 

Single  Copy,  per  year,  post-paid,          -  -          $1.00 

In  clubs  of  ten  or  more  copies,  per  year,  each,          '   .75 
To  foreign  countries,  single  subscription,  post-paid,  5s. 

Address,  AMERICAN  SENTINEL,  43  Bond  Street,  New  York. 
THE     NRTIONRL     SflNDRY     LflW         This  pamphlet  contains  the  »- 

me  nmiumu.  jununi   Lnw.     gumeiltsmbchaif  or  the  rights 

of  American  citizens,  and  in  opposition  to  the  Blair  Sunday-rest  bill,  which  Alonzo  T. 
Jones  presented  before  the  Senate  Committee  on  Education  and  Labor,  Dec.  13, 
1888.  Mr.  Crafts  has  pronounced  the  report  as  published  as  "mighty  interesting  read- 
ing." And  Mr.  Jones's  comments  make  it  more  so.  His  argument  is  enlarged  to  what  it 
would  have  been  without  Senator  Blair's  interruptions,  objections,  and  counter-argu- 
ments, and  is  accompanied  with  answers  to  all  of  his  objections  and  counter-arguments. 
As  the  Sunday  question  is  now  a  living  issue,  this  treatise  will  be  interesting  to  all 
classes,  especially  legislators,  lawyers,  judges,  and  other  public  men.  The  argument 
is  based  on  Scripture  and  history,  constitution  and  law,  showing  the  limits  of  the  civil 
power,  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  Sunday  bill,  an  analysis  of  tlie  Sunday  laws  and 
other  religious  legislation  of  the  different  States,  the  Sunday-law  movement  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  the  Sunday-law  movement  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  methods 
used  in  securing  indorsements  to  the  petition  for  the  Blair  bill,  and  the  workings  of  such 
Sunday-laws  as  are  proposed  for  the  United  States. 

The  work  contains  192  paires,  and  will  be  sent  post-paid  on  receipt  of  '25  cents. 

Address  the  publishers  of  "  Two  Republics." 

THF     CRFHT     mNTROUFR^vY     Revised  and  enlarged  to  over  TOO  oc. 

inc   uncm    iunii\uuci\ji    tavo  pageSi  handgomely  boundt  with 

38  full-page  illustrations.  Cloth,  $2.25;  gilt  edges,  $2.75;  library,  $3.00;  half  morocco, 
$3.50;  full  morocco,  $1.50. 

Those  who  desire  to  follow  further  the  subject  treated  in  "  The  Two  Republics,"  will 
find  in  "The  Great  Controversy  "  (issued  by  the  name  publishers)  nn  excellent  account 
of  that  which  is  to  follow,  with  much  other  matter  of  absorbing  interest,  and  worthy  of 
careful  study. 


RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY  LIBRARY. 


A  monthly  publication  (with  occasional  extras)  published  by  the  INTERNATIONAL 
RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY  ASSOCIATION.  The  following  have  been  issued  :— 

No.  1.  Due  Process  of  Law  and  the  Divine  Right  of  Dissent.  A  review  of  Judge 
Hammond's  decision  in  the  King  case.  By  A.  T.  Jones.  120  pages.  Price  15  cts. 

No.  2.  Religious  Intolerance  in  the  Republic.  A  portrayal  of  recent  persecutions  in 
Tennessee.  16  pages.  Price  2  cts. 

No.  3.  Church  and  State.  By  James  T.  Ringgold,  of  the  Baltimore  Bar.  60  pages. 
Price  10  cts. 

No.  4.  The  National  Sunday  Law.  Arguments  by  A.  T.  Jones  in  opposition  to  the 
Blair  Sunday-rest  Bill.  192  pages.  Price  25  cts. 

No.  5.  Sunday  Laws  in  the  United  States.    By  James  T.  Ringgold.    24  pages.    Price  3  cts. 

No.  6.  The  Captivity  of  the  Republic.    128  pages.    Price  15  cts. 

No.  7.  Appeal  and  Remonstrance.     24  pages.    Price  3  cts. 

No.  8.  Appeal  from  the  U.  S.  Supreme  Court  Decision  Making  this  a  "  Christian 
Nation."  A  Protest.  By  A.  T.  Jones.  86  pages.  Price  15  cts. 

No.  10.  Religious  Liberty  and  the  Mormon  Question.    20  pages.    Price  2^  cts. 

No.  11.  The  "  Civil  Sabbath  ;  "  or  Disguised  Religious  Legislation.    12  pp.    Price  1%  cts. 

No.  12.  The  Columbian  Year,  and  the  Meaning  of  the  Four  Centuries.    44  pages. 

Price,  5*4   cts. 

No.  13.  The  Limits  of  Civil  Authority.    12  pages.    Price  i^  cts. 

No.  14.  Christ  and  the  Sabbath.    4°  pages.    Price  5  cts. 

No.  15.  Rome's  Challenge  :  Why  Do  Protestants  Keep  Sunday  ?    40  pages.    Price  5  cts. 

No.  16.  Our  Answer :    Why  do  Seventh-day  Adventists  Suffer  Imprisonment  Rather 

than   Keep  Sunday?     By  A.  F.  Ballenger.      12  pages.     Price    i1/,   cts. 

No.  18.  Christ  and  the  Pharisees;  or,  Christ's   Faithfulness  in  Sabbath-keeping.— 

40  pages.     Price  5  cts. 

No.  19.  Protestantism,  True  and  False.    32  pages.    Price  4  cts. 

No.  20.  Civil  Government  and  Religion.    182  pages.    Price  25  cts. 

No.  21.  Congress  on  Sunday  Legislation.    16  pages.    Price  i^  cts. 

No.  22.  The  Legal  Sunday  :  Its  History  and  Character.  260  pages.  Price  40  cts.  The 
same  in  cloth,  75  cts. 

No.  23.  The  Sabbath  Question  in  the  Dominion  Parliament,  as  viewed  by  Hon.  G. 
Amyot,  M.  P.  12  pages.  Price  ij^  cts. 

No.  24.  What  Do  These  Things  Mean  ?  The  true  meaning  of  the  present  unsettled 
condition  of  "Capital  and  Labor,"  finances,  etc.  20  pages.  Price  2%  cts. 

No.  25.  "The  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary."    16  pages.    Price 

2  CtS. 

No.  26.  The  Puritan  Sabbath  for  "  Physical  Rest."    12  pages.    Price  i^  cts. 

No.  27.  Religious  Persecution,  or  the  "  Blue  Laws"  Revived.    60  pages.    Price  8  cts. 

No.  28.  Now  in  Jail  for  Conscience' Sake.    8  pages.    Price  i  ct. 

No.  29.  Papacy  and  Prophecy,  or  the  "  Sovereign  Pontiff "  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  by 
L.  Gaussen,  Professor  of  Theology.  32  pages.  Price,  4  cts. 

No  30.  Papacy  and  Persecution,  or  Did  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  Ever  Persecute? 
By  C.  P.  Bollman.  16  pages.  Price  2  cts.  , 

Ansiual  subscription  to  the  Library,  Ji.  Liberal  discounts  on  any  of  the  numbers  in 
quantities  and  to  the  trade. 


23952